Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:An increased posterior tibial slope (PTS) is a risk factor for primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears and graft failure, but the PTS has not been well-defined in those who have experienced bilateral ACL injuries. PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:The primary aim was to compare the PTS, as well as the rate of an elevated PTS (>12° on lateral radiography; >7° on magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]), between patients who have undergone bilateral ACL reconstruction (ACLR) versus unilateral ACLR. A secondary purpose was to examine whether these associations remained consistent on both plain radiography and MRI. STUDY DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:We retrospectively identified patients who underwent primary ACLR at our institution from the years 2012 to 2020. Patients who underwent nonsimultaneous bilateral ACLR (n = 53) were matched to those who underwent unilateral ACLR (n = 53) by age, sex, and body mass index. Exclusion criteria were rotated lateral radiographs, MRI scans of inadequate quality, and concomitant ligament injuries or fractures. Those who had undergone unilateral ACLR with <5-year follow-up were further excluded. There were 3 blinded readers who measured the PTS on lateral radiographs, while the medial PTS (MPTS) and lateral PTS (LPTS) were measured on MRI scans. Bivariate regression was performed to determine the correlation between radiographic and MRI measurements. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:= .810). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:Patients who underwent bilateral ACLR had a significantly greater PTS on radiography and a significantly greater LPTS on MRI compared with those who underwent unilateral ACLR. The rate of a radiographic PTS >12° was 2.4 times greater among patients undergoing bilateral ACLR compared with those undergoing unilateral ACLR. PTS measurements on radiography demonstrated a weak to negligible correlation with PTS measurements on MRI, suggesting that future normative PTS values should be reported specific to the imaging modality.

BACKGROUND:Acute Rockwood type III-V acromioclavicular (AC) dislocations have been treated with numerous surgical techniques over the years. The purpose of this study was to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to quantitatively define the optimal treatment for operative AC dislocations. METHODS:A literature search of three databases was performed on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RCTs comparing one of ten treatments for acute Rockwood type III-V AC dislocations (Nonoperative [NO]; Kirschner wire fixation [KW]; Coracoclavicular screw fixation [Scr]; Hook plate [HP]; Open coracoclavicular cortical button [CBO]; Arthroscopic coracoclavicular cortical button [CBA]; Two or more coracoclavicular cortical buttons [CB2]; Isolated graft reconstruction [GR]; cortical button with graft augmentation [CB+GR]; coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular fixation [AC]) were included. Clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist approach to NMA, with statistical analysis performed using R. Treatment options were ranked using the P-score, which estimates the likelihood that the investigated treatment is the ideal method for an optimal result in each outcome measure on a scale from 0 - 1. RESULTS:From 5362 reviewed studies, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 1581 patients included in the NMA. AC, CB+GR, GR, CB2, CBA, and CBO demonstrated superiority over HP, Scr, KW, and NO treatments at final follow up for Constant-Murley and DASH scores, with AC and CB+GR demonstrating the highest P-scores for Constant (P-score = 0.957 and 0.781, respectively) and GR and CBO with the highest P-scores for DASH (P-score = 0.896 and 0.750, respectively). GR had the highest P-score for VAS (P-score = 0.986). HP, CB2, CB+GR, AC, CBA, and CBO demonstrated superiority with final follow up coracoclavicular distance (CCD) and recurrence, with HP and CB2 having the highest P-score for CCD (P-score = 0.798 and 0.757, respectively) and GR and CB+GR having the highest P-score for recurrence (P-score = 0.880 and 0.855, respectively). KW and Scr had the shortest operative times (P-score = 0.917 and 0.810, respectively), with GR and CBA demonstrating longest operative times (P-score = 0.120 and 0.097, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:While there are multiple fixation options for acute surgical AC dislocations, adding AC fixation or graft augmentation likely improves functional outcomes and decreases CCD and recurrence at final follow up, at the expense of longer operative times.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Acute Achilles tendon ruptures (AATRs) are a common sporting injury, whether for recreational athletes or elite athletes. Prior research has shown returning to physical activity after extended periods of inactivity leads to increased rates of musculoskeletal injuries. The purpose of this study was to investigate rates of acute Achilles' tendon ruptures at a single academic institute in the peri-COVID era, with corollary to the recent NFL season. METHODS:A retrospective search was conducted using current procedural terminology to identify the total number of Achilles acute primary repair surgeries performed from years 2017 to 2021. Non-operatively managed AATRs were identified from the same electronic medical record using ICD-10 codes. NFL data were obtained from publicly available sites according to previously validated studies. RESULTS:A total of 588 patients who sustained AATRs and underwent primary surgical repair were identified, primarily men (75.7%, n = 445), with an average age of 43.22 ± 14.4 years. The number and corresponding incidence of AATR repairs per year was: 2017: n = 124 (21.1%), 2018: n = 110 (18.7%), 2019: n = 130 (22.1%), 2020: n = 86 (14.6%), 2021: n = 138 (23.5%), indicating a 7.5% decrease in rate of AATRs from 2019 to 2020, followed by an 8.9% increase in incidence from 2020 to 2021. Within the NFL, the number of AATRs resulting in an injured reserve stint increased every regular season from 2019 to 2020: n = 11 (21.2%), to 2020-2021: n = 17 (32.7%), to this past 2021-2022 season: n = 24 (46.2%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:AATR surgeries seem to have increased in 2021 following a 2020 COVID pandemic-induced quarantine for recreational athletes at a single academic institution and for professional athletes in the NFL, although these results are of questionable clinical significance. This provides prognostic information when counseling patients and athletes on return to activity or sport. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level IV.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements on the treatment of UCL injuries and to investigate whether consensus on these distinct topics could be reached. METHODS:A modified consensus technique was conducted among twenty-six elbow surgeons and 3 physical therapists/athletic trainers. Strong consensus was defined as 90-99% agreement. RESULTS:Of the 19 total questions and consensus statements 4 achieved unanimous consensus, 13 achieved strong consensus, and 2 did not achieve consensus. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There was unanimous agreement that the risk factors include overuse, high velocity, poor mechanics, and prior injury. There was unanimous agreement that advanced imaging in the form of either an MRI or MRA should be performed in a patient presenting with suspected/known UCL tear that plans to continue to play an overhead sport, or if the imaging study could change the management of the patient. There was unanimous agreement regarding lack of evidence for the use of orthobiologics in the treatment of UCL tears as well as the areas pitchers should focus on when attempting a course of non-operative management. The statements that reached unanimous agreement for operative management were regarding operative indications and contraindications for UCL tears, prognostic factors that should be taken into consideration in when performing UCL surgery, how to deal with the flexor-pronator mass during UCL surgery and use of an internal brace with UCL repairs. Statements that reached unanimous agreement for RTS were regarding: portions of the physical exam should be considered when determining whether to allow a player to RTS, unclear how velocity, accuracy, and spin rate should be factored into the decision of when players can RTS and sports psychology testing should be used to determine whether a player is ready to RTS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Expert opinion (Level V).

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:The purposes of this study were to determine why athletes did not return to play (RTP) following operative management of superior-labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears, compare these athletes to those who did RTP, and evaluate the SLAP-Return to Sport after Injury (SLAP-RSI) score to assess the psychological readiness of athletes to RTP after operative management of SLAP tears. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective review of athletes who underwent operative management of SLAP tears with a minimum of 24-month follow-up was performed. Outcome data, including visual analog scale (VAS) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, patient satisfaction, and whether they would undergo the same surgery again was collected. Additionally, the rate and timing of return to work (RTW), the rate and timing of RTP, SLAP-RSI score, and VAS during sport were evaluated, with subgroup analysis among overhead and contact athletes. The SLAP-RSI is a modification of the Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SI-RSI) score, with a score >56 considered to be a passing score for being psychologically ready to RTP. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = .001) were all associated with greater likelihood of return to sports at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Following the operative management of SLAP tears, patients who are unable to RTP exhibit poor psychological readiness to return, which may be due to residual pain in overhead athletes or fear of reinjury in contact athletes. Lastly, the SLAP-RSI tool in combination with ASES proved to be useful in identifying patients' psychological and physical readiness to RTP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/UNASSIGNED:Level IV, prognostic case series.

PURPOSE/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate functional outcomes and satisfaction in patients who underwent telerehabilitation (telerehab) compared with in-person rehabilitation after arthroscopic meniscectomy. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A randomized-controlled trial was conducted including patients scheduled to undergo arthroscopic meniscectomy for meniscal injury by 1 of 5 fellowship-trained sports medicine surgeons between September 2020 and October 2021. Patients were randomized to receive telerehab, defined as exercises and stretches provided by trained physical therapists over a synchronous face-to-face video visit or in-person rehabilitation for their postoperative course. International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC) score and satisfaction metrics were collected at baseline and 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: = .044) if there were in the in-person group. Satisfaction differed significantly between the 2 groups at the end of their rehabilitation course, and only 64% of those in the telerehab group would elect to undergo telerehab again for future indications. Furthermore, they believed that future rehabilitation would benefit from a hybrid model. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Telerehab showed no difference versus traditional in-person rehabilitation in terms of functional outcomes up to 3 months after arthroscopic meniscectomy. However, patients were less satisfied with telerehab. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/UNASSIGNED:I, randomized controlled trial.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective analysis of outcomes in cervical spine and shoulder arthroscopy patients. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study is to assess differential improvements in health-related quality of life for cervical spine surgery compared with shoulder surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:An understanding of outcome differences between different types of orthopedic surgeries is helpful in counseling patients about expected postoperative recovery. This study compares outcomes in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery with arthroscopic shoulder surgery using computer-adaptive Patient-reported Outcome Information System scores. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Patients undergoing cervical spine surgery (1-level or 2-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, cervical disc replacement) or arthroscopic shoulder surgery (rotator cuff repair±biceps tenodesis) were grouped. Patient-reported Outcome Information System scores of physical function, pain interference, and pain intensity at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months were compared using paired t tests. RESULTS:Cervical spine (n=127) and shoulder (n=91) groups were similar in sex (25.8% vs. 41.8% female, P=0.731) but differed in age (51.6±11.6 vs. 58.60±11.2, P<0.05), operative time (148.3±68.6 vs. 75.9±26.9 min, P<0.05), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASAs) (2.3±0.6 vs. 2.0±0.5, P=0.001), smoking status (15.7% vs. 4.4%, P=0.008), and length of stay (1.1±1.0 vs. 0.3±0.1, P=0.000). Spine patients had worse physical function (36.9 ±12.6 vs. 49.4±8.6, P<0.05) and greater pain interference (67.0±13.6 vs. 61.7±4.8, P=0.001) at baseline. Significant improvements were seen in all domains by 3 months for both groups, except for physical function after shoulder surgery. Spine patients had greater physical function improvements at all timepoints (3.33 vs. -0.43, P=0.003; 4.81 vs. 0.08, P=0.001; 6.5 vs. -5.24, P=<0.05). Conversely, shoulder surgery patients showed better 6-month improvement in pain intensity over spine patients (-8.86 vs. -4.46, P=0.001), but this difference resolved by 12 months. CONCLUSIONS:Cervical spine patients had greater relative early improvement in physical function compared with shoulder patients, whereas pain interference and intensity did not significantly differ between the 2 groups after surgery. This will help in counseling patients about relative difference in recovery and improvement between the 2 surgery types. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is the primary restraint to tibial internal rotation and is supported by secondary stabilizers, including the iliotibial band (ITB), anterolateral ligament (ALL), anterolateral capsule, and lateral meniscus, which provide additional rotational control. Combined injury to primary and secondary rotational stabilizers can lead to anterolateral rotatory instability. This can best be demonstrated in patients with large pivot-shifts. Biomechanical studies have demonstrated that ACL reconstruction (ACLR) alone does not restore native kinematics in the setting of a combined injury. Concomitant anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) and lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) techniques have been evaluated as a possible solution. Both the LET and ALLR may help restore rotational control, with the LET being slightly more powerful due to its more horizontal force vector based on biomechanical studies. However, there may be a slight risk of overconstraint with both techniques, more pronounced with the LET. Clinical studies evaluating the techniques for both primary and revision ACLR have generally found both to be safe and effective, leading to decreased rates of re-rupture and improved outcome scores. Either technique is a reasonable addition to ACLR when additional rotational control is indicated, though the LET may be more reproducible.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair is a procedure that has been used to treat torn ACLs dating back to the early 1900s. With unpredictable outcomes of repair, a paradigm shift led to surgeons to opt for ACL reconstruction as a new gold standard, as the evidence showed a more reliable outcome. However, there has been a recent resurgence in ACL repair worthy of review, particularly in proximal avulsions. Suture anchor repair is one repair technique in which recent studies show low failure rates, low reoperation rates, and favorable clinical outcomes. More recent data supports augmenting this strategy with suture tape. An innovation in ACL repair techniques is the Bridge-Enhanced ACL Repair (BEAR) technique, which combines a patient's whole blood with a collagen-based scaffold to augment the repair. While promising results have been shown with these techniques, narrow indications are necessary for a successful ACL repair.

OBJECTIVE:To determine whether concomitant psychiatric diagnoses and medication use were associated with postfasciotomy outcomes in patients with chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS). DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective comparative cohort study. SETTING/METHODS:Single academic medical center from 2010 to 2020. PATIENTS/METHODS:All patients above 18 years old who underwent fasciotomy for CECS. ASSESSMENT OF RISK FACTORS/INDEPENDENT VARIABLES/UNASSIGNED:Psychiatric history was recorded from electronic health records including disease diagnosis and medications. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES/METHODS:The 3 main outcome measures were postoperative pain using the Visual Analog Scale, functional outcomes using the Tegner Activity Scale, and return to sport. RESULTS:Eighty one subjects (legs), 54% male, with an average age of 30 years and follow-up of 52 months were included. 24 subjects (30%) had at least one psychiatric diagnosis at the time of surgery. Regression analysis found psychiatric history to be an independent predictor of worse postoperative pain severity and postoperative Tegner scores (P < 0.05). Furthermore, subjects with psychiatric disorders not on medication had worse pain severity (P < 0.001) and Tegner scores (P < 0.01) versus controls, whereas subjects with a psychiatric disorder on medication had better pain severity (P < 0.05) versus controls. CONCLUSIONS:History of psychiatric disorder was predictive of worse postoperative pain and activity outcomes after fasciotomy for CECS. Use of psychiatric medication was associated with improvement in pain severity in some domains.