Faculty Bibliography

»: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.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease; however, the indeterminate nature of mechanisms by which OA develops has restrained advancement of therapeutic targets. TNF signalling has been implicated in the pathogenesis of OA. TNFR1 primarily mediates inflammation, whereas emerging evidences demonstrate that TNFR2 plays an anti-inflammatory and protective role in several diseases and conditions. This study aims to decipher TNFR2 signalling in chondrocytes and OA. METHODS:Biochemical copurification and proteomics screen were performed to isolate the intracellular cofactors of TNFR2 complex. Bulk and single cell RNA-seq were employed to determine 14-3-3 epsilon (14-3-3ε) expression in human normal and OA cartilage. Transcription factor activity screen was used to isolate the transcription factors downstream of TNFR2/14-3-3ε. Various cell-based assays and genetically modified mice with naturally occurring and surgically induced OA were performed to examine the importance of this pathway in chondrocytes and OA. RESULTS:Signalling molecule 14-3-3ε was identified as an intracellular component of TNFR2 complexes in chondrocytes in response to progranulin (PGRN), a growth factor known to protect against OA primarily through activating TNFR2. 14-3-3ε was downregulated in OA and its deficiency deteriorated OA. 14-3-3ε was required for PGRN regulation of chondrocyte metabolism. In addition, both global and chondrocyte-specific deletion of 14-3-3ε largely abolished PGRN's therapeutic effects against OA. Furthermore, PGRN/TNFR2/14-3-3ε signalled through activating extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK)-dependent Elk-1 while suppressing nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) in chondrocytes. CONCLUSIONS:This study identifies 14-3-3ε as an inducible component of TNFR2 receptor complex in response to PGRN in chondrocytes and presents a previously unrecognised TNFR2 pathway in the pathogenesis of OA.

Although anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a generally successful procedure, failure is still relatively common. An increased posterior tibial slope (PTS) has been shown to increase the anterior position of the tibia relative to the femur at rest and under load in biomechanical studies. Increased PTS has also been shown to increase forces on the native and reconstructed ACL. Clinical studies have demonstrated elevated PTS in patients with failed ACLR and multiple failed ACLR, compared with control subjects. Anterior closing-wedge osteotomies have been shown to decrease PTS and may be indicated in patients who have failed ACLR with a PTS of ≥12°. Available clinical data suggest that the procedure is safe and effective, although evidence is limited to case series. This article presents the relevant biomechanics, clinical observational data on the effects of increased PTS, and an algorithm for evaluating and treating patients with a steep PTS.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of the current study is to systematically review and network meta-analyze the current evidence in the literature to ascertain if there is a superior lateral extra-articular augmentation technique in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACL.R) with respect to knee stability, re-rupture rates and functional outcomes. METHODS:The literature search was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort studies comparing ACL.R to ACL.R + lateral extra-articular augmentation were included. Lateral extra-articular techniques included were anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALL.R), Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, Losee, Maraccaci, and McIntosh. Clinical outcomes were compared between ACL.R alone and the different lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score. RESULTS:Twenty-eight studies with a total of 2990 patients were included. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold technique had the highest P-Score for ACL re-ruptures and residual pivot-shift. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, and ALL.R all significantly reduced the rate of ACL re-rupture, and residual pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. There was no significant difference between any of the lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques and ACL.R alone. ALL.R had the highest P-Score for return to play, and return to play at pre-injury level. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study established that ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire and ALL.R resulted in significantly lower ipsilateral ACL re-ruptures, as well as reduced pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. Whereas, the other lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques did not reduce pivot-shift and re-rupture. Additionally, functional outcomes and return to play were comparable between those who underwent ACL.R and lateral extra-articular augmentation and ACL.R alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR) is often indicated in athletes with lateral patellar instability to prevent recurrence and allow for a successful return to play. In this patient population, the ability to return to play is one of the most important clinical outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to analyze the characteristics of patients who were unable return to play following MPFL reconstruction. METHODS:A retrospective review of patients who underwent MPFL reconstruction and subsequently did not return to play after a minimum of 12-months of follow-up was performed. Patients were evaluated for their psychological readiness to return to sport using the MPFL-Return to Sport after Injury (MPFL-RSI) score, which is a modification of the ACL-RSI score. A MPFL-RSI score > 56 is considered a passing score for being psychologically ready to return to play. Additionally, reasons for not returning to play including Visual Analog Scale for pain (VAS), Kujala score, satisfaction, and recurrent instability (including dislocations and subluxations) were evaluated. RESULTS:The study included a total of 35 patients who were unable to return to play out of a total cohort of 131 patients who underwent MPFL reconstruction as treatment for patellar instability. Overall, 60% were female with a mean age of 24.5, and a mean follow-up of 38 months. Nine patients (25.7%) passed the MPFL-RSI benchmark of 56 with a mean overall score of 44.2 ± 21.8. The most common primary reasons for not returning to play were 14 were afraid of re-injury, 9 cited other lifestyle factors, 5 did not return due to continued knee pain, 5 were not confident in their ability to perform, and 2 did not return due to a feeling of instability. The mean VAS score was 1.9 ± 2.3, the mean Kujala score was 82.5 ± 14.6, and the mean satisfaction was 76.9%. Three patients (8.7%) reported experiencing a patellar subluxation event post-operatively. No patient sustained a post-operative patellar dislocation. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Following MPFL reconstruction, patients that do not return to play exhibit poor psychological readiness with the most common reason being fear of re-injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:IV.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to determine whether a preoperative video-based opioid education reduced narcotics consumption after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in opioid-naive patients. METHODS:This was a single-center randomized controlled trial. Preoperatively, the control group received our institution's standard of care for pain management education, whereas the experimental group watched an educational video on the use of opioids. Patients were discharged with 30 × 5 mg/325 mg oxycodone-acetaminophen prescribed: 1 to 2 tablets every 4 to 6 hours. They were contacted daily and asked to report opioid use and visual analog scale pain. A chart review at 3 months post-op was used to analyze for opioid refills. RESULTS:A total of 130 patients completed the study (65 control and 65 experimental). No statistically significant differences were noted in patient demographics between groups (P > 0.05). Patients in the education group did not use a statistically significant different number of narcotics than the control group throughout the first postoperative week (14.0 pills experimental versus 13.7 pills control, P = 0.60). No statistically significant differences were noted between groups at follow-regarding the rate of prescription refills (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study suggests that preoperative video-based opioid education may have no effect on reducing the number of narcotic pills consumed after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. CLINICAL RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:Data exist to suggest that preoperative video-based opioid education has an effect on postoperative consumption; however, the effect of this education in the setting of already-limited opioid-prescribing is not known. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER/UNASSIGNED:NCT04018768.

Objectives: Patients with a superior labral anterior to posterior (SLAP) tear of the shoulder are often initially treated non-operatively, but many do not respond and require surgery. Identifying patients who are likely to fail non-operative management and would benefit from early surgical intervention can shorten time of disability and limit resources utilized on unsuccessful treatments. The purpose of this study is to create a clinical prediction model to determine which patients are likely to fail non-operative treatment of SLAP tears and require surgical intervention.
Method(s): This was a case-control study consisting of patients treated at a single institution for isolated, non-degenerative SLAP tears. Patients with concomitant rotator cuff tears were excluded from this analysis. Patients were retrospectively surveyed using the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) system regarding clinical features of their shoulder injury, non-operative treatments that they received, and key functional outcomes during their post-injury period. Responders underwent additional medical record review to identify other variables related to the clinical presentation and treatment of their shoulder injury. In order to simplify the predictive model and optimize its interpretability, the lasso (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) method of penalized logistic regression analysis was used to identify the characteristics that were most closely associated with failure of nonoperative treatment. The data was randomly split into a training set and test set. Using the training set, the value of lambda which minimized cross-validation prediction error rate was determined (Figure 1). The final lasso model was then computed. The predictive accuracy of the final model was assessed using the test data set.
Result(s): Overall, 189 patients were contacted and included in the analysis. The mean age of included patients was 29.9 +/- 6.7 years. Thirty-eight patients (20.1%) were female. One hundred and six patients (56.1%) failed non-operative management and required surgical intervention. The final lasso model identified a total of 9 variables that were significantly associated with failure of non-operative management of SLAP tears (Table 1). These predictors included pre-injury overhead sports participation, presence of specific symptoms, severity of pain, and the type of non-operative treatment modalities used. Injury to the dominant extremity, history of prior shoulder injury, patient age, use of NSAIDs, and occupation involving manual labor or overhead work were not associated with failure of nonoperative treatment. The predictive accuracy of the model was 70.3% (95% CI 53.0%, 84.1%). Sensitivity of the model was 81.0% and specificity was 56.3%.
Conclusion(s): A clinical prediction model consisting of variables describing patient characteristics, specific symptoms, and the type of non-operative treatment modalities utilized was found to predict failure of non-operative management of SLAP tears with moderate accuracy. Further refinements of this prediction model, including the inclusion of additional physical examination and imaging variables, will be required before future iterations are tested in clinical practice

Objectives: Superior-labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears are common among athletic populations and may require surgical treatment. Return to play post-operatively may be complicated by a number of factors, including psychological readiness to return. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of the SLAP Return to Sport Index (SLAP-RSI) score to quantify psychological readiness to return to play following operative management of SLAP tears.
Method(s): A retrospective review of athletes who underwent operative management of SLAP tears with a minimum of 12-month follow-up was performed. Patients were evaluated for their psychological readiness to return to sport using the SLAP-RSI score. The SLAP-RSI score was created by adapting the terms in the Anterior (ACL-RSI score) with terms related to SLAP tears. A SLAP-RSI score > 56 is considered a passing score for being psychologically ready to return to play.
Result(s): The study included 174 athletes who underwent operative management of SLAP tears. Overall, 73.5% percent of patients were able to return to play, and the mean SLAP-RSI score in this cohort was 74.1+/-20.9, as compared to 46.7+/-27.7 in those who were unable to return (p<0.0001). Of those who returned, 82.1% passed the SLAP-RSI benchmark of 56, while of those who did not return, 33.3% passed the SLAP-RSI benchmark of 56. Additionally, a significant difference was found in each component of the SLAP-RSI score between the two cohorts (p<0.05). No individual component of the SLAP-RSI score was below 56 in patients who were able to return to play, while none was above 56 in those who were unable to return. Among patients who were unable to return, ones who cited lifestyle reasons had a higher SLAP-RSI score (77.4 +/- 21.8) than those who cited residual pain (28.2 +/- 15.1) or fear of re-injury (42.6 +/- 23.6) (p<0.0001).
Conclusion(s): Following the operative management of SLAP repair, patients that are unable to return to play exhibit poor psychological readiness to return which may be due to residual pain or fear of re-injury