Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process on revision surgery, rehabilitation and return to play, and clinical follow-up for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS:A consensus process on the treatment using a modified Delphi technique was conducted, with 65 shoulder surgeons from 14 countries across 5 continents participating. Experts were assigned to one of 9 working groups defined by specific subtopics of interest within anterior shoulder instability. RESULTS:The primary relative indications for revision surgery include symptomatic apprehension or recurrent instability, additional intra-articular pathologies, and symptomatic hardware failure. In revision cases, the differentiating factors that dictate treatment are the degree of glenohumeral bone loss and rotator cuff function/integrity. The minimum amount of time before allowing athletes to return to play is unknown, but other factors should be considered, including restoration of strength, range of motion and proprioception, and resolved pain and apprehension, as these are prognostic factors of reinjury. Additionally, psychological factors should be considered in the rehabilitation process. Patients should be clinically followed up for a minimum of 12 months or until a return to full, premorbid function/activities. Finally, the following factors should be included in anterior shoulder instability-specific, patient-reported outcome measures: function/limitations impact on activities of daily living, return to sport/activity, instability symptoms, confidence in shoulder, and satisfaction. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Overall, 92% of statements reached unanimous or strong consensus. The statements that reached unanimous consensus were indications and factors affecting decisions for revision surgery, as well as how prior surgeries impact procedure choice. Furthermore, there was unanimous consensus on the role of psychological factors in the return to play, considerations for allowing return to play, as well as prognostic factors. Finally, there was a lack of unanimous consensus on recommended timing and methods for clinical follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level V, expert opinion.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process on the diagnosis, nonoperative management, and Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS:A consensus process on the treatment using a modified Delphi technique was conducted, with 65 shoulder surgeons from 14 countries across 5 continents participating. Experts were assigned to one of 9 working groups defined by specific subtopics of interest within anterior shoulder instability. RESULTS:The independent factors identified in the 2 statements that reached unanimous agreement in diagnosis and nonoperative management were age, gender, mechanism of injury, number of instability events, whether reduction was required, occupation, sport/position/level played, collision sport, glenoid or humeral bone-loss, and hyperlaxity. Of the 3 total statements reaching unanimous agreement in Bankart repair, additional factors included overhead sport participation, prior shoulder surgery, patient expectations, and ability to comply with postoperative rehabilitation. Additionally, there was unanimous agreement that complications are rare following Bankart repair and that recurrence rates can be diminished by a well-defined rehabilitation protocol, inferior anchor placement (5-8 mm apart), multiple small-anchor fixation points, treatment of concomitant pathologies, careful capsulolabral debridement/reattachment, and appropriate indications/assessment of risk factors. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Overall, 77% of statements reached unanimous or strong consensus. The statements that reached unanimous consensus were the aspects of patient history that should be evaluated in those with acute instability, the prognostic factors for nonoperative management, and Bankart repair. Furthermore, there was unanimous consensus on the steps to minimize complications for Bankart repair, and the placement of anchors 5-8 mm apart. Finally, there was no consensus on the optimal position for shoulder immobilization. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level V, expert opinion.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Changes in the intra-articular inflammatory state during the immediate period after an acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture are not well defined. PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate changes in the concentration of select proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory synovial fluid cytokines during the interval between an ACL injury and surgical reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Descriptive laboratory study. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:In patients with an acute ACL injury, a synovial fluid sample was obtained from the injured knee during the initial office visit within 2 weeks of the inciting traumatic event. An additional synovial fluid sample was collected at the time of ACL reconstruction just before the surgical incision. Synovial fluid samples from both the acute injury and the surgery time points were processed with a protease inhibitor, and the concentrations of 10 cytokines of interest were measured using a multiplex magnetic bead immunoassay. The primary outcome was the change in cytokine concentrations between time points. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:A total of 20 patients with a mean age of 30.2 ± 8.3 years were included. The acute injury synovial fluid samples were collected at 6.6 ± 3.8 days after the injury. The surgical synovial fluid samples were collected at 31.6 ± 15.6 days after the acute injury samples. Based on a series of linear mixed-effects models to control for the effect of concomitant meniscal injuries and by-patient variability, there was a statistically significant increase in the concentrations of RANTES and bFGF and a statistically significant decrease in the concentrations of IL-6, MCP-1, MIP-1β, TIMP-1, IL-1Ra, and VEGF between time points. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:This study demonstrates the ongoing alterations in the intra-articular microenvironment during the initial inflammatory response in the acute postinjury period. We identified 6 synovial fluid cytokines that significantly decreased and 2 that significantly increased between the first clinical presentation shortly after the injury and the time of surgery 1 month later. CLINICAL RELEVANCE/UNASSIGNED:This study describes the molecular profile of the inflammatory changes between the time of an acute ACL injury and the time of surgical reconstruction 1 month later. A greater understanding of the acute inflammatory response within the knee may be helpful in identifying the optimal timing for a surgical intervention that balances the risk of chondral damage with the likelihood of successful, well-healed reconstruction.

»:A high tibial osteotomy (HTO) is a joint-preserving procedure that can be used to treat symptomatic unicompartmental cartilage disorders in the presence of limb malalignment. »:Appropriate patient selection and careful preoperative planning are vital for optimizing outcomes. »:Based on past literature, correction of varus malalignment to 3° to 8° of valgus appears to lead to favorable results. Recently, there has been growing awareness that it is important to consider soft-tissue laxity during preoperative planning. »:Although there has been a recent trend toward performing opening-wedge rather than closing-wedge or dome HTOs for unicompartmental osteoarthritis, current data suggest that all 3 are acceptable techniques with varying complication profiles. »:Based on current evidence, an HTO provides pain relief, functional improvement, and a high rate of return to sport, with reported survivorship ranging from 74.7% to 97.6% and 66.0% to 90.4% at 10 and 15 years, respectively.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to perform a network meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the literature in order to assess the evidence defining the optimal combination of surgical technique single row repair (SRR), double-row repair (DRR), or transosseous-equivalent/suture-bridge (TOE/SB) arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) and postoperative rehabilitation (early or late) protocol for ARCR. METHODS:The literature search was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized SSR-Early trials (RCT) comparing SRR vs DRR vs TOE/SB ARCR techniques were included, as well as early versus late postoperative ROM. Clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score. RESULTS:28 studies comprising 2,181 total shoulders met the inclusion criteria. TOE/SB-late (OR 0.19 [0.08;0.46) and DRR-late (OR 0.25 [0.12;0.52) were found to significantly reduce the rate of re-tear, with TOE/SB-late resulting in the highest P-score for the American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons (ASES) (P Score: 0.7911) score and re-tear rate (P Score: 0.8725). DRR-early did not result in any significant improvements over the SRR-early group, except in internal rotation. There was no significant difference in forward flexion between groups, with almost equivalent P-Scores. Furthermore, TOE/SB-early and TOE/SB-late trended toward worsening external rotation compared to the control. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The current study suggests that rotator cuff repair using the transosseous-equivalent/suture-bridge technique and late postoperative mobilization yields the highest functional outcomes and lowest re-tear rate in the arthroscopic management of symptomatic rotator cuff tears.

»:Biceps tendon pathologies include a spectrum of injuries that range from mild tendinosis to complete tendon rupture. »:Tendinosis, the most common pathology, occurs more frequently with age and is likely related to chronic degeneration. On the other side of the spectrum of severity lies a rupture of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT), which may be accompanied by injury to the glenoid labrum. »:Superior labral anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears are frequently associated with biceps pathology. Surgical management for injuries of the bicipital-labral complex includes biceps tenodesis or tenotomy and SLAP repair. A consensus as to which of these procedures is the optimal choice has not been reached, and management may ultimately depend on patient-specific characteristics. »:Due to the relatively low incidence of distal biceps tendon rupture, agreement on the optimal management strategy has not been reached. Surgical repair, or reconstruction in the case of a chronic rupture, is often chosen. However, nonoperative management has also been utilized in older, less-active patients.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is a term synonymous with orthopaedic clinical research over the past decade. The term represents the smallest change in a patient-reported outcome measure that is of genuine clinical value to patients. It has been derived in a myriad of ways in existing orthopaedic literature. PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:To describe the various modalities for deriving the MCID. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Narrative review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:The definitions of common MCID determinations were first identified. These were then evaluated by their clinical and statistical merits and limitations. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:There are 3 primary ways for determining the MCID: anchor-based analysis, distribution-based analysis, and sensitivity- and specificity-based analysis. Each has unique strengths and weaknesses with respect to its ability to evaluate the patient's clinical status change from baseline to posttreatment. Anchor-based analyses are inherently tied to clinical status yet lack standardization. Distribution-based analyses are the opposite, with strong foundations in statistics, yet they fail to adequately address the clinical status change. Sensitivity and specificity analyses offer a compromise of the other methodologies but still rely on a somewhat arbitrarily defined global transition question. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:This current concepts review demonstrates the need for (1) better standardization in the establishment of MCIDs for orthopaedic patient-reported outcome measures and (2) better study design-namely, until a universally accepted MCID derivation exists, studies attempting to derive the MCID should utilize the anchor-based within-cohort design based on Food and Drug Administration recommendations. Ideally, large studies reporting the MCID as an outcome will also derive the value for their populations. It is important to consider that there may be reasonable replacements for current derivations of the MCID. As such, future research should consider an alternative threshold score with a more universal method of derivation.