Search

Background: Recurrent tears of the rotator cuff pose a substantial problem despite advances in repair technique. Biologic augmentation via marrow stimulation or vented anchors may strengthen the suture-tendon junction and improve healing rates of native tissue, thereby enhancing outcomes of primary surgical repair. Purpose: To provide a focused systematic review and meta-analysis of local, intraoperative marrow-derived augmentation techniques in clinical primary rotator cuff repair. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 2131 studies from 2010 to 2022, focused on either marrow stimulation or vented anchors, were isolated and classified as either preclinical or clinical. Meta-analysis was performed for comparative marrow stimulation and vented anchor studies. Heterogeneity was tested through calculation of I 2. Results: A total of 13 clinical studies were included in the review. All 9 comparative studies included in the meta-analysis demonstrated high methodologic quality or a low risk of bias. The pooled retear rate across all 9 clinical studies for patients undergoing marrow stimulation was 11%. For the 5 studies in the meta-analysis, the pooled retear rates were 15% for marrow stimulation and 30% for controls. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significant difference in the overall retear rate that favored marrow stimulation (odds ratio [OR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.25-0.66; P = .0003; I 2 = 0%). Similarly, meta-analysis of the Constant score at final follow-up demonstrated a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups that favored a higher Constant score in the marrow stimulation group (mean difference, 2.84; 95% CI, 1.02-4.66; P = .002; I 2 = 29%). Vented anchors demonstrated improved ossification and bone density at the anchor site, but no difference in outcomes or retear. Pooled retear rates were 22.5% for vented anchors and 27.8% for controls. Conclusion: Current evidence demonstrates that marrow-stimulation techniques may have a positive impact on healing and retear rate, while vented anchors have a muted impact relative to nonvented anchors. Although available evidence is limited and more research is needed, findings to date suggest that marrow stimulation techniques may be an inexpensive, straightforward technique to consider in qualifying patients to prevent rotator cuff retears.

The purpose of this study was to examine the factors commonly used to determine readiness for RTS in the ACL-R patient population and assess which were most influential to successfully returning to sport and avoiding re-tear.The PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies related to RTS in ACL-R. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to identify studies with greater than 1-year outcomes detailing the rate of return and re-tear given a described RTS protocol. Data of interest was extracted and studies were stratified based on level of evidence and selected study features. Meta-analysis and/or subjective synthesis of appropriate studies was used to assess over 25 potentially significant variables effecting RTS and re-tear.After initial search of 1503 studies, 47 articles were selected for inclusion in the final data analysis including a total of 1432 patients (31.4% females, 68.6% male). A meta-analysis of re-tear rate for included Level of Evidence 1 studies was calculated to be 2.8%. Subgroups including protocols containing a strict time until RTS, strength testing, and ≥2 dynamic tests demonstrated decreased RTS and re-tear heterogeneity from the larger group. Time to RTS, strength testing, dynamic functional testing, and knee stability were also found to be among the most prevalent reported criteria in RTS protocol studies.This study suggests a multifactorial clinical algorithm for successful evaluation of RTS. The "critical criteria" recommended by the authors to be part of the postoperative RTS criteria include time since surgery of 8 months, use of2 functional tests, psychological readiness testing, and quadriceps/hamstring strength testing in addition to the modifying patient factors of age and female gender.Level IV, Systematic Review of Level IV or better investigations.

Background: Biologic healing after rotator cuff repair remains a significant challenge. Injectable biologic augmentation may improve tissue quality at the suture-tendon interface. Purpose: To investigate the effect of injectable biologic supplementation in rotator cuff repair and to assess the quality and adherence to evolving reporting standards. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Included were 40 studies: 29 preclinical (in vivo animal models) and 11 clinical. Each clinical study was assessed for quality, risk of bias, and adherence to relevant MIBO (Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics) guidelines. The outcomes of interest were reported load to failure, load to gap, gap size, and stiffness in the preclinical studies, and healing rate and any patient-reported outcome measures in the clinical studies. Results: Injectables reported included growth factors (eg, transforming growth factor–beta 3, erythropoietin), bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells and adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs), and other agents such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid. The most common findings for preclinical injectables were increased load to failure (16/29 studies; 55.2%) and improved collagen histological quality (11/29 studies; 37.9%). All 11 clinical studies (10 PRP, 1 ADSC) indicated no adverse events, with similar or improved patient-reported outcomes compared with repairs in the control groups. In 1 study utilizing an innovative delivery technique, a concentrated PRP globule with fibrin matrix was shuttled over a suture to maintain concentrated PRP at the repair site and demonstrated a significant decrease in retears ( P = .03) at a 31-month follow-up. A matched-cohort study investigating augmentation with ADSCs demonstrated a significantly lower retear rate in the ADSC-augmented group than the control group at a 28-month follow-up ( P < .001). On average, the clinical studies adhered to 66% of relevant MIBO reporting guidelines and had a low risk of bias. Conclusion: Approximately 83% of preclinical studies found a positive biomechanical or histological effect, with no studies showing an overall negative effect. Clinically, utilization of innovative delivery techniques may reduce the risk of arthroscopic washout of PRP and improve retear rates. ADSCs were shown to reduce retear rates at a 28-month follow-up.

Currently, appropriateness criteria evaluating when to perform total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is lacking. In the absence of society guidelines and limited quality evidence, the RAND/University California in Los Angeles (UCLA) method provides a suitable alternative to evaluate appropriateness and assist in clinical decision making. Given the rise in utilization, appropriateness criteria for TSA have the potential to be an extremely powerful tool for improving quality of care and controlling costs. Thus, the goal of this study was to test explicit criteria to assess the appropriateness of TSA decision making using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.A review of recent scientific literature to gather available evidence about the use, effectiveness, efficiency, and the risks involved in surgical intervention was performed by a shoulder/elbow fellowship trained physician. Based on pertinent variables including age, rotator cuff status, previous surgical management, mobility, symptomatology, and imaging classifications, 186 clinical scenarios were created. Appropriateness criteria for TSA were developed using a modified Delphi method with a panel consisting of American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) members. A second panel of ASES members rated the same scenarios, with reliability testing performed to compare groups.Panel members reached agreement in 40 (64%) indications. TSA was appropriate in 15 (24%) of indications. For patients with severe symptomatology, TSA was often appropriate for patients aged75 years and inconclusive or inappropriate for patients aged75 years. Among patients aged65 years, TSA varied between appropriate and inconclusive, often dependent on Walch classification. For patients with moderate symptomatology, TSA was inappropriate or inconclusive for patients aged65 or75 years. When compared to the second panel's results, moderate agreement was obtained with a weighted kappa statistic of 0.56.Using the RAND/UCLA method, ASES members created an appropriateness decision tree for pertinent patient variables. This presents the data in a manner that streamlines the clinical decision-making process and allows for rapid and more reliable determination of appropriateness for practitioners. The decision tree is based on a combination of clinical experience from high-volume ASES-member surgeons and a comprehensive review of current evidence. This tool can be used as part of a broader set of factors, including individual patient characteristics, prior studies, and expert opinion, to inform clinical decision making, improve quality of care, and control costs.