Search

To perform an updated systematic review comparing the clinical outcomes of autograft versus nonirradiated allograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify comparative studies directly comparing outcomes of primary ACLR with autograft versus nonirradiated allograft with a minimum 2-year follow-up. The search terms used were: "anterior cruciate ligament" AND autograft AND allograft AND (irradiation OR non-irradiated). Patients were evaluated based on graft failure rates, the Objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, anteroposterior laxity, and patient-reported outcomes (Subjective IKDC score, the visual analog scale [VAS], the Cincinnati Knee Rating System, Lysholm, and Tegner scores). Risk of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I and Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool for non-randomized and randomized studies, respectively.Sixteen studies (3 Level I, 7 Level II, 6 Level III) met inclusion criteria, including a total of 15,502 patients undergoing ACLR with autograft and 1,577 with nonirradiated allograft. The average follow-up ranged from 24.0 to 132.0 months. Graft failure ranged from 0% to 9.4% of patients in the autograft group and 0% to 26.5% in the allograft group. Two studies showed greater failure rates among younger patients in the allograft group. There were no significant differences between the Objective IKDC score, anteroposterior laxity, or patient-reported outcomes between the groups within any of the included studies (Autograft and nonirradiated allograft for primary ACLR demonstrate similar patient-reported outcomes and graft failure rates.III, systematic review of level I-III studies.

Importance Arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis (ABT) and open subpectoral biceps tenodesis (OBT) are two surgical treatment options for relief of long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) pathology and superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears. There is insufficient knowledge regarding the clinical superiority of one technique over the other. Objective To systematically review the literature in order to compare the clinical outcomes and safety of ABT and OBT for treatment of LHBT or SLAP pathology. Evidence review A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase to identify studies that compared the clinical efficacy of ABT versus OBT. The search phrase used was: (bicep OR biceps OR biceps brachii OR long head of biceps brachii OR biceps tendinopathy) AND (tenodesis). Patients were assessed based on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score, the visual analogue scale, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Constant-Murley Score, clinical failure, range of motion, bicipital groove pain and strength. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed, and both the Cochrane Collaboration’s and Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) risk of bias tools were used to evaluate risk of bias. Findings Eight studies (one level I, seven level III) met inclusion criteria, including 326 patients undergoing ABT and 381 patients undergoing OBT. No differences were found in treatment failure rates or patient-reported outcome scores between groups in any study. One study found OBT patients to experience significantly increased range of shoulder forward flexion when compared with ABT patients (p=0.049). Two studies found ABT patients to experience significantly more postoperative stiffness when compared with OBT patients (p Conclusions Patients undergoing ABT and OBT can be expected to experience similar improvements in clinical outcomes at latest follow-up without differences treatment failure or functional performance. ABT patients may experience an increased incidence of stiffness in the early postoperative period. Level of evidence III.

Background: Patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision report lower outcome scores on validated knee questionnaires postoperatively compared to cohorts with primary ACL reconstruction. In a previously active population, it is unclear if patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are associated with a return to activity (RTA) or vary by sports participation level (higher level vs. recreational athletes). Hypotheses: Individual RTA would be associated with improved outcomes (ie, decreased knee symptoms, pain, function) as measured using validated PROs. Recreational participants would report lower PROs compared with higher level athletes and be less likely to RTA. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: There were 862 patients who underwent a revision ACL reconstruction (rACLR) and self-reported physical activity at any level preoperatively. Those who did not RTA reported no activity 2 years after revision. Baseline data included patient characteristics, surgical history and characteristics, and PROs: International Knee Documentation Committee questionnaire, Marx Activity Rating Scale, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. A binary indicator was used to identify patients with same/better PROs versus worse outcomes compared with baseline, quantifying the magnitude of change in each direction, respectively. Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate risk factors for not returning to activity, the association of 2-year PROs after rACLR surgery by RTA status, and whether each PRO and RTA status differed by participation level. Results: At 2 years postoperatively, approximately 15% did not RTA, with current smokers (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.3; P = .001), female patients (aOR = 2.9; P < .001), recreational participants (aOR = 2.0; P = .016), and those with a previous medial meniscal excision (aOR = 1.9; P = .013) having higher odds of not returning. In multivariate models, not returning to activity was significantly associated with having worse PROs at 2 years; however, no clinically meaningful differences in PROs at 2 years were seen between participation levels. Conclusion: Recreational-level participants were twice as likely to not RTA compared with those participating at higher levels. Within a previously active cohort, no RTA was a significant predictor of lower PROs after rACLR. However, among patients who did RTA after rACLR, approximately 20% reported lower outcome scores. Most patients with rACLR who were active at baseline improved over time; however, patients who reported worse outcomes at 2 years had a clinically meaningful decline across all PROs.

Background: Patients undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery have been shown to have elevated activity levels. Factors associated with shoulder activity in this patient population at baseline and after surgery are unknown. Hypothesis: Patient-specific variables are associated with shoulder activity level at baseline and at 2-year follow-up in a cohort of patients undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery were prospectively enrolled. As part of the data collection process, patients completed a previously validated Shoulder Activity Scale. A regression analysis was performed to assess the association of patient characteristics with baseline and 2-year follow-up shoulder activity levels. Results: A total of 764 (n = 612 men, n = 152 women) out of 957 patients (80%) undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery with a median age of 25 years had baseline and 2-year follow-up data and were included in the current analysis. The baseline shoulder activity level was associated with race ( P < .0001) and preoperative duration of instability ( P < .0001). At 2 years, 52% of the cohort had returned to the same or higher activity level after surgery. Predictors of higher shoulder activity level at 2-year follow-up included higher baseline activity level ( P < .0001), male sex ( P < .0001), younger age ( P = .004), higher body mass index (BMI) ( P = .03), more dislocations ( P = .03), nonsmokers ( P = .04), and race ( P = .04). Conclusion: A longer duration of preoperative symptoms was associated with a lower baseline activity in this cohort. High baseline preoperative shoulder activity, younger age, male sex, higher BMI, number of dislocations, and nonsmoking status predicted higher shoulder activity 2 years after shoulder stabilization surgery. Registration: NCT02075775 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

PURPOSE To compare the biomechanical properties of the knotted versus knotless transosseous-equivalent (TOE) techniques for rotator cuff repair (RCR). METHODS A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify studies that compared the biomechanical properties of knotted and knotless TOE RCR techniques. The search phrase used was as follows: (Double Row) AND (rotator cuff) AND (repair) AND (biomechanical). Evaluated properties included ultimate load to failure, cyclic displacement, stiffness, footprint characteristics, and failure mode. RESULTS Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 67 specimens in each group. Of 6 studies reporting on ultimate load to failure, 4 found tendons repaired with the knotted TOE technique to experience significantly higher ultimate load to failure compared with knotless TOE repairs (knotted range, 323.5-549.0 N; knotless range, 166.0-416.8 N; P < .05). Of 6 studies reporting on failure stiffness, 2 found knotted TOE repairs to have significantly higher failure stiffness compared with knotless TOE repairs (knotted range, 30.0-241.8 N/mm; knotless range, 28.0-182.5 N/mm; P < .05), whereas 1 study found significantly higher failure stiffness in knotless TOE repairs compared with knotted TOE repairs (P = .039). Cyclic gap formation favored the knotted TOE group in 2 of 3 studies (knotted range, 0.6-5.2 mm; knotless range, 0.4-9.1 mm; P < .05). The most common mode of failure in both groups was suture tendon tear. CONCLUSIONS On the basis of the included cadaveric studies, rotator cuff tendons repaired via the knotted TOE technique display superior time-zero biomechanical properties, including greater ultimate load to failure, compared with rotator cuffs repaired via the knotless TOE technique. Suture tearing through the tendon remains a common failure method for both techniques. CLINICAL RELEVANCE The results of this systematic review provide helpful insight into the biomechanical differences between 2 popular techniques for RCR. Although these results should be carefully considered by surgeons who are using either of these techniques in the operating room, they should not be mistaken for direct clinical applicability because cadaveric studies may not directly correlate to clinical outcomes.

Background: Although graft choice may be limited in the revision setting based on previously used grafts, most surgeons believe that graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is an important factor related to outcome. Hypothesis: In the ACL revision setting, there would be no difference between autograft and allograft in rerupture rate and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 6-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients who had revision surgery were identified and prospectively enrolled in this cohort study by 83 surgeons over 52 sites. Data collected included baseline characteristics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated PRO measures. Patients were followed up at 6 years and asked to complete the identical set of PRO instruments. Incidence of additional surgery and reoperation because of graft failure were also recorded. Multivariable regression models were used to determine the predictors (risk factors) of PROs, graft rerupture, and reoperation at 6 years after revision surgery. Results: A total of 1234 patients including 716 (58%) men were enrolled. A total of 325 (26%) underwent revision using a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autograft; 251 (20%), soft tissue autograft; 289 (23%), BTB allograft; 302 (25%), soft tissue allograft; and 67 (5%), other graft. Questionnaires and telephone follow-up for subsequent surgery information were obtained for 809 (66%) patients, while telephone follow-up was only obtained for an additional 128 patients for the total follow-up on 949 (77%) patients. Graft choice was a significant predictor of 6-year Marx Activity Rating Scale scores ( P = .024). Specifically, patients who received a BTB autograft for revision reconstruction had higher activity levels than did patients who received a BTB allograft (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.25-2.94). Graft rerupture was reported in 5.8% (55/949) of patients by their 6-year follow-up: 3.5% (16/455) of patients with autografts and 8.4% (37/441) of patients with allografts. Use of a BTB autograft for revision resulted in patients being 4.2 times less likely to sustain a subsequent graft rupture than if a BTB allograft were utilized ( P = .011; 95% CI, 1.56-11.27). No significant differences were found in graft rerupture rates between BTB autograft and soft tissue autografts ( P = .87) or between BTB autografts and soft tissue allografts ( P = .36). Use of an autograft was found to be a significant predictor of having fewer reoperations within 6 years compared with using an allograft ( P = .010; OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87). Conclusion: BTB and soft tissue autografts had a decreased risk in graft rerupture compared with BTB allografts. BTB autografts were associated with higher activity level than were BTB allografts at 6 years after revision reconstruction. Surgeons and patients should consider this information when choosing a graft for revision ACL reconstruction.

Purpose To evaluate the quality and content of internet-based information available for some of the most common orthopaedic sports medicine terms. Methods A search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines was performed. All English-language literature published from 2010 to 2020 discussing information quality pertaining to orthopaedic sports medicine terms was included. Outcomes included the search engines used, number and type of websites evaluated, platform, and quality scoring metrics. Descriptive statistics are presented. Results This review includes 21 studies. Of these, 3 evaluated both the upper and lower extremity. Twelve focused on either the upper or lower extremity, most commonly rotator cuff tears (3 of 12) and/or anterior cruciate ligament pathologies (7 of 12). The most common engines were Google (18 of 21), Bing (16 of 21), Yahoo (16 of 21), YouTube (3 of 21), Ask (3 of 21), and AOL (2 of 21). The average number of media files assessed per study was 87 ± 55. Website quality was assessed with DISCERN (7 of 21), Flesch-Kincaid (9 of 21), Health on the Net (7 of 21), and/or Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark (7 of 21) scores. YouTube was evaluated with Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark scores (1.74 ± 1.00). Image quality was reported in 2 studies and varied with search terminology. Conclusions The results of this systematic review suggest that physicians should improve the quality of online information and encourage patients to access credible sources when conducting their own research. Clinical Relevance Doctors can and should play an active role in closing the gap between the level of health literacy of their patients and that of most common online resources.

Purpose To identify factors predictive of a large labral tear at the time of shoulder instability surgery. Methods As part of the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort, patients undergoing open or arthroscopic shoulder instability surgery for a labral tear were evaluated. Patients with >270° tears were defined as having large labral tears. To build a predictive logistic regression model for large tears, the Feasible Solutions Algorithm was used to add significant interaction effects. Results After applying exclusion criteria, 1235 patients were available for analysis. There were 222 females (18.0%) and 1013 males (82.0%) in the cohort, with an average age of 24.7 years (range 12 to 66). The prevalence of large tears was 4.6% (n = 57), with the average tear size being 141.9°. Males accounted for significantly more of the large tears seen in the cohort (94.7%, P = .01). Racquet sports (P = .01), swimming (P = .02), softball (P = .05), skiing (P = .04), and golf (P = .04) were all associated with large labral tears, as was a higher Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI; P = .01). Age, race, history of dislocation, and injury during sport were not associated with having a larger tear. Using our predictive logistic regression model for large tears, patients with a larger body mass index (BMI) who played contact sports were also more likely to have large tears (P = .007). Conclusions Multiple factors were identified as being associated with large labral tears at the time of surgery, including male sex, preoperative WOSI score, and participation in certain sports including racquet sports, softball, skiing, swimming, and golf. Level of Evidence I, prognostic study.

Purpose To perform an updated systematic review of the anatomy, biomechanics, function of the anterolateral ligament (ALL), and the clinical outcomes of anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) when performed in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Methods A systematic search of the literature was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase with the search phrase anterolateral ligament for articles published from February 2017 to May 2020. Inclusion criteria included studies that evaluated the anatomy, function, or biomechanics of the ALL; surgical technique articles on ALLR; clinical articles reporting outcomes of ALLR; studies published in English; and full-text articles. Exclusion criteria included studies published before February 2017. A subjective synthesis was performed, in which ranges were reported, and individual study data were presented in forest plots. Results Overall, 40 articles were included in this systematic review, with 11 articles describing ALL anatomy, 14 articles analyzing ALL function and biomechanics, 7 articles discussing the surgical technique of combined ACLR and ALLR (ACLR/ALLR), and 8 articles describing the clinical outcomes of ACLR/ALLR. The addition of ALLR in combination with ACLR (ACLR+) results in lower graft failure rates for ACLR/ALLR (0.0%–15.7%) when compared with isolated ACLR (I-ACLR) patients (7.4%–21.7%). Three of 5 studies using the Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee score, 2 of 5 studies using the Lysholm score, and 1 of 2 studies using the Tegner score reported significantly better scores at latest follow-up among ACLR+ patients compared with I-ACLR (P Conclusions The ALL acts as a secondary stabilizer to the anterior cruciate ligament and helps resist internal knee rotation and anterior tibial translation. Based on the current literature, combined ACLR with ALLR may result in lower graft failure rates and improved patient-reported outcomes when compared with I-ACLR in patients with specific indications, although several studies have shown equivalent outcomes between these 2 cohorts. Clinical Relevance The contents of this review provide great insight for orthopaedic surgeons who are performing ACLR and considering additional procedures to increase overall knee stability and decrease likeliness for re-rupture. The postoperative functional and clinical outcomes shown in patients undergoing ACLR+ compared with I-ACLR should be given proper consideration when evaluating available treatment courses.

Purpose To evaluate the process of applying to orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships from the applicant’s perspective, with a focus on number of program applications, interviews, interview day importance, and financial burden. Methods An anonymous electronic survey was distributed to all orthopaedic surgery residents who applied to orthopaedic sports medicine fellowships in the United States in 2016 and 2017. The survey contained 26 questions, with 10 pertaining to applicant demographics, accolades, and examination scores. A follow up e-mail was distributed at 2 and 4 weeks to increase participation. Results The survey was distributed to 453 sports medicine fellowship applicants; 148 (34.1%) completed the survey. Of the respondents, 130 (87.8%) were male and 18 (12.2%) were female. When analyzing United States Medical Licensing Examination scores, respondents who scored above a 251 on Step 2 CK were more likely to receive more than 20 interviews compared with those who scored lower (P = .013). Previous collegiate or professional athlete status did not influence the number of interviews received. In total, 94 of 147 (64.0%) respondents applied to more than 20 programs, and 73 respondents (49.7%) attended between 11 and 15 interviews. The majority of respondents spent between $4001 and $6000 (49; 33.1%) throughout the application process. Interaction with faculty and case volume/complexity were the most important factors in ranking programs. Conclusions The majority of orthopaedic surgery residents pursue at least 1 year of fellowship training following residency, with sports medicine being one of the most popular specialties. The application process for sports medicine fellowships is complex, competitive, and a financial burden for applicants. Most applicants apply to more than 20 programs, spend between $4000 and $6,000 over the course of the application process, and value faculty interaction and case volume/complexity over other factors associated with a program. Clinical Relevance As other surgical fellowships have detailed their application process from the applicant's perspective, there remains a need for increased transparency of the sports medicine fellowship application in order to offer additional insight and guidance for future applicants.

Background: Various analgesic modalities have been used to improve postoperative pain in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To systematically review the literature to compare the efficacy of the fascia iliaca block (FIB) with that of other analgesic modalities after hip arthroscopy in terms of postoperative pain scores and analgesic consumption. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase up to April 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared postoperative pain and analgesic consumption in patients after hip arthroscopy with FIB versus other pain control modalities. The search phrase used was “hip arthroscopy fascia iliaca randomized.” Patients were evaluated based on postoperative pain scores and total postoperative analgesic consumption. Results: Five studies (3 level 1, 2 level 2) were identified that met inclusion criteria, including 157 patients undergoing hip arthroscopy with FIB (mean age, 38.3 years; 44.6% men) and 159 patients among the following comparison groups: lumbar plexus block (LPB), intra-articular ropivacaine (IAR), local anesthetic infiltration (LAI), saline placebo, and a no-block control group (overall mean age, 36.2 years; 36.5% men). No significant differences in pain scores were reported in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) between the FIB and LPB (3.4 vs 2.9; P = .054), IAR (7.7 vs 7.9; P = .72), control group (no FIB: 4.1 vs 3.8; P = .76); or saline placebo (difference, –0.2 [95% CI, –1.1 to 0.7]). One study reported significantly higher pain scores at 1 hour postoperation in the FIB group compared with the LAI group (5.5 vs 3.4; P = .02). Another study reported significantly greater total analgesic consumption (in morphine equivalent dosing) in the PACU among the FIB group compared with the LPB group (20.8 vs 17.0; P = .02). No significant differences were observed in total PACU analgesic consumption between FIB and other analgesic modalities. Conclusion: In patients undergoing hip arthroscopy, the FIB does not appear to demonstrate superiority to other forms of analgesics in the immediate postoperative period. Therefore, it is not recommended as a routine form of pain control for these procedures.

Background The purpose of this study was to identify differences related to race in preoperative and intraoperative findings of patients undergoing operative treatment for shoulder instability. Methods Data from the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort were used. Of 1010 patients, 995 provided race and ethnicity information and were included in the analyses. Demographic characteristics, injury history, radiographic and intraoperative findings, and preoperative patient-reported instability, pain, and function were compared (1) between white and minority patients and (2) in a subgroup analysis between white patients and the 3 largest minority groups. The Distressed Communities Index (DCI) score was recorded for each patient’s home ZIP code. Multiple logistic regressions were performed to determine whether models consisting of race/ethnicity, insurance carrier, and/or DCI score were predictive of bone and cartilage loss at the time of surgery. Results Compared with white patients, a greater percentage of US minority patients had ≥2 dislocations (68.0% vs. 57.1%, P = .01), which corresponded with more frequent articular cartilage lesions (62.2% vs. 51.0%, P = .007) and increased frequencies of glenoid bone loss > 10% (16.2% vs. 8.7%, P = .03) and Hill-Sachs lesions (68.6% vs. 56.0%, P = .004). Specifically, when compared with white patients, African American and Asian patients showed significantly increased frequencies of glenoid bone loss > 10% (19.7% of African American patients, 18.4% of Asian patients, and 8.9% of white patients; P = .01) and Hill-Sachs lesions (65.6%, 71.7%, and 52.4%, respectively; P = .02). Race was an independent predictor of articular cartilage lesions (P = .04) and the presence of Hill-Sachs lesions (P = .01). A higher DCI score (P = .03) and race (P = .04) were both predictive of having glenoid bone loss > 10%. Conclusion We found that minority race was associated with increased number of preoperative dislocations and increased frequency of articular cartilage and Hill-Sachs lesions at the time of surgery, and both minority race and an increased DCI score were associated with glenoid bone loss > 10%. Further research is needed to understand the underlying reason for these differences and to optimize care for all patients with shoulder instability.

Background: Marrow stimulation (MST) surgery, which includes microfracture, subchondral drilling, and abrasion arthroplasty, and autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) are 2 surgical options to treat articular cartilage lesions in the knee joint. Recent studies have suggested worse outcomes when ACI is used after failed MST. Purpose: To investigate the failure rates and clinical outcomes of primary knee ACI versus ACI after failed MST surgery (secondary ACI). Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies evaluating clinical outcomes of patients undergoing primary versus secondary ACI of the knee joint. The search terms used were as follows: “knee” AND (“autologous chondrocyte implantation” OR “osteochondral allograft”) AND (microfracture OR “marrow stimulation”). Patients undergoing primary ACI (group A) were compared with those undergoing secondary ACI (group B) based on treatment failure rates and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Results: Seven studies (2 level 2 studies, 5 level 3 studies) were identified and met inclusion criteria, including a total of 1335 patients (group A: n = 838; group B: n = 497). The average patient age in all studies was 34.2 years, and the average lesion size was 5.43 cm2. Treatment failure occurred in 14.0% of patients in group A and 27.6% of patients in group B ( P < .00001). Four studies reported PROs. One study found significantly better Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee scores ( P = .011), visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores ( P = .028), and VAS function scores ( P = .005) in group A. Another study found significantly better Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain scores ( P = .034), KOOS Activities of Daily Living scores ( P = .024), VAS pain scores ( P = .014), and VAS function scores ( P = .032) in group A. Two studies found no significant difference in PROs between groups A and B ( P < .05). Conclusion: Patient-reported improvement can be expected in patients undergoing primary or secondary ACI of the knee joint. Patients undergoing secondary ACI have a significantly higher risk of treatment failure and may have worse subjective outcomes compared with patients undergoing primary ACI.

Anterior shoulder (glenohumeral joint [GHJ]) dislocations are relatively common injuries in sports. Previous studies have evaluated clinical outcomes of operative and nonoperative management for primary traumatic anterior GHJ dislocations. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature in an effort to provide a thorough analysis of patients after undergoing closed reduction of a traumatic anterior GHJ dislocation, particularly among the athletic population. Two independent reviewers performed a comprehensive search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library through February 23, 2020. Unfortunately, the quantity and quality of published articles on this subject is very limited. In many studies, younger age (between 21 and 30 years) was associated with greater risk for recurrence of GHJ dislocations. Twelve studies (total N = 753) directly compared outcomes of operative versus nonoperative management. It seems that operative management significantly reduces recurrence rates with patients treated operatively among the young and active population. Operative management should be considered as a treatment option for young and athletic patients presenting with a first-time anterior GHJ dislocation.

Infection is a rare occurrence after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (rACLR). Because of the low rates of infection, it has been difficult to identify risk factors for infection in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to report the rate of infection following rACLR and assess whether infection is associated with patient- and surgeon- dependent risk factors. We reviewed two large prospective cohorts to identify patients with postoperative infections following rACLR. Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, history of diabetes, and graft choice were recorded for each patient. The association of these factors with postoperative infection following rACLR was assessed. There were 1423 rACLR cases in the combined cohort, with 9 (0.6%) reporting post-operative infections. Allografts had a higher risk of infection than autografts (odds ratio=6.8; 95% CI: 0.9-54.5; p=0.045). Diabetes (odds ratio=28.6; 95% CI: 5.5-149.9; p=0.004) was a risk factor for infection. Patient age, sex, BMI and smoking status were not associated with risk of infection after rACLR. STATEMENT OF CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: While there is a low rate of infection following rACLR, use of allograft and comorbidity with diabetes are associated with a higher risk of infection following this surgery.

Background: Meniscal preservation has been demonstrated to contribute to long-term knee health. This has been a successful intervention in patients with isolated tears and tears associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the results of meniscal repair in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction have not been documented. Purpose: To examine the prevalence and 2-year operative success rate of meniscal repairs in the revision ACL setting. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All cases of revision ACL reconstruction with concomitant meniscal repair from a multicenter group between 2006 and 2011 were selected. Two-year follow-up was obtained by phone and email to determine whether any subsequent surgery had occurred to either knee since the initial revision ACL reconstruction. If so, operative reports were obtained, whenever possible, to verify the pathologic condition and subsequent treatment. Results: In total, 218 patients (18%) from 1205 revision ACL reconstructions underwent concurrent meniscal repairs. There were 235 repairs performed: 153 medial, 48 lateral, and 17 medial and lateral. The majority of these repairs (n = 178; 76%) were performed with all-inside techniques. Two-year surgical follow-up was obtained on 90% (197/218) of the cohort. Overall, the meniscal repair failure rate was 8.6% (17/197) at 2 years. Of the 17 failures, 15 were medial (13 all-inside, 2 inside-out) and 2 were lateral (both all-inside). Four medial failures were treated in conjunction with a subsequent repeat revision ACL reconstruction. Conclusion: Meniscal repair in the revision ACL reconstruction setting does not have a high failure rate at 2-year follow-up. Failure rates for medial and lateral repairs were both

Background: The cause of subsequent surgery after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction varies, but if risk factors for specific subsequent surgical procedures can be identified, we can better understand which patients are at greatest risk. Purpose: To report the incidence and types of subsequent surgery that occurred in a cohort of patients 6 years after their index ACL reconstruction and to identify which variables were associated with the incidence of patients undergoing subsequent surgery after their index ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients completed a questionnaire before their index ACL surgery and were followed up at 2 and 6 years. Patients were contacted to determine whether any underwent additional surgery since baseline. Operative reports were obtained, and all surgical procedures were categorized and recorded. Logistic regression models were constructed to predict which patient demographic and surgical variables were associated with the incidence of undergoing subsequent surgery after their index ACL reconstruction. Results: The cohort consisted of 3276 patients (56.3% male) with a median age of 23 years. A 6-year follow-up was obtained on 91.5% (2999/3276) with regard to information on the incidence and frequency of subsequent surgery. Overall, 20.4% (612/2999) of the cohort was documented to have undergone at least 1 subsequent surgery on the ipsilateral knee 6 years after their index ACL reconstruction. The most common subsequent surgical procedures were related to the meniscus (11.9%), revision ACL reconstruction (7.5%), loss of motion (7.8%), and articular cartilage (6.7%). Significant risk factors for incurring subsequent meniscus-related surgery were having a medial meniscal repair at the time of index surgery, reconstruction with a hamstring autograft or allograft, higher baseline Marx activity level, younger age, and cessation of smoking. Significant predictors of undergoing subsequent surgery involving articular cartilage were higher body mass index, higher Marx activity level, reconstruction with a hamstring autograft or allograft, meniscal repair at the time of index surgery, or a grade 3/4 articular cartilage abnormality classified at the time of index ACL reconstruction. Risk factors for incurring subsequent surgery for loss of motion were younger age, female sex, low baseline Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score symptom subscore, and reconstruction with a soft tissue allograft. Conclusion: These findings can be used to identify patients who are at the greatest risk of incurring subsequent surgery after ACL reconstruction.

Background: The number of golfers aged ≥65 years has increased in recent years, and shoulder arthritis is prevalent in this age group. Guidelines for return to golf (RTG) after shoulder arthroplasty have not been fully established. Purpose: To review the data available in the current literature on RTG after shoulder arthroplasty. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed. Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library using the terms “shoulder,”“arthroplasty,”“replacement,” and “golf.” The authors sought to include all studies investigating RTG after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), shoulder hemiarthroplasty (HA), and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Outcomes of interest included indications for shoulder arthroplasty, surgical technique, rehabilitation protocol, amount of time between surgery and resumption of golf activity, and patient-reported outcome measures. Results: A total of 10 studies were included, 2 of which reported on golf performance after shoulder arthroplasty. The other 8 studies described return to sports after shoulder arthroplasty with golf-specific data for our analysis. Three studies that included patients who underwent TSA reported RTG rates ranging from 89% to 100% after mean follow-up periods of 5.1 to 8.4 months. Two studies included patients who underwent TSA and HA and reported RTG rates of 77% and 100% after mean intervals of 5.8 and 4.5 months, respectively. Two studies included patients who underwent RSA, with RTG rates of 50% and 79% after mean postoperative intervals of 5.3 and 6 months, respectively. One study included only patients undergoing HA, with an RTG rate of 54% and a mean RTG time of 6.5 months. Varying surgical procedures and baseline patient characteristics precluded our ability to draw conclusions regarding surgical technique, rehabilitation protocol, or patient-reported outcome measures among studies reporting these data. Conclusion: Most patients who undergo a shoulder arthroplasty procedure can expect to resume playing golf approximately 6 months after the index procedure. The rate of return may be lower after RSA and HA as compared with anatomic TSA. The data presented in our review can help physicians counsel patients who wish to continue golf participation after a shoulder arthroplasty procedure.

Purpose To systematically review the literature to compare the adductor canal block (ACB) with the femoral nerve block (FNB) following primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in terms of early postoperative analgesic requirements and postoperative quadriceps strength. Methods A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase up to August 2019 to identify randomized controlled trials that compared postoperative pain and functional outcomes in patients following primary ACLR with ACB versus FNB. The search phrase used was: adductor canal femoral nerve anterior cruciate ligament. Patients were evaluated based on analgesic consumption and quadriceps muscle strength. Study quality and risk of bias were evaluated with the Modified Coleman Methodology Score and Cochrane risk-of-bias tool respectively. Results Five studies (all Level I evidence) were identified that met inclusion criteria, including 221 patients undergoing primary ACLR with ACB (mean age 26.8 years, 68.3% male) and 221 with FNB (mean age 28.2 years, 67.0% male). Statistical assessment for heterogeneity found for opioid consumption of ACB versus FNB groups was I2 = 97% (P Conclusions In patients undergoing ACLR, the ACB may provide similar analgesic requirements, and the included studies suggest a potential advantage in preserving muscle strength at short-term (24-48 hours) follow-up when compared with FNB. However, the differences in muscle strength assessments between studies do not allow for strong conclusions. Level of Evidence I, systematic review and meta-analysis of Level I studies.

Purpose To systematically review the literature in an effort to compare the demographics and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with a hamstring tendon autograft (HT) versus an irradiated or nonirradiated hybrid autograft-allograft. Methods A systematic review of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. All English-language literature that reported general demographics and compared the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing primary ACLR with autograft versus hybrid graft (HG) with a minimum 2-year follow-up was reviewed by 2 independent reviewers. Search terms used were “anterior cruciate ligament” and “hybrid graft.” Patients were assessed based on graft failure, anteroposterior laxity, and patient-reported outcomes (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, visual analog scale, Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lysholm, and Tegner scores). Study quality was evaluated with the Modified Coleman Methodology Score and ROBINS-I risk of bias tool. Results Twelve studies (1 level II, 11 level III) met inclusion criteria (follow-up, 2.0-8.9 years), including 471 patients undergoing ACLR with an irradiated hybrid graft (IH), 89 patients with a nonirradiated hybrid graft, and 829 patients with HT. Graft diameter ranged from 7.5 to 10.0 mm and from 6.5 to 10.0 mm in HG and HT patients, respectively. Overall, graft failure ranged from 0% to 30.0% and from 0% to 28.3% in HG and HT patients, respectively (I2 = 35.9%; 95% confidence interval 0%-74.8%). Among HG patients, graft failure ranged from 0%-30.0% and from 2.4%-4.2% in IH and nonirradiated hybrid graft groups, respectively (I2 = 33.6%; 95% confidence interval, 0%-71.8%). Results for postoperative anteroposterior laxity and patient-reported outcomes were also inconsistent. Conclusions Patients undergoing ACLR with HT demonstrate inconsistent differences in clinical outcomes at midterm follow-up compared with IH patients. Level of Evidence III, systematic review of level II and III studies.

Background: Patients with posterior shoulder instability may have bone and cartilage lesions (BCLs) in addition to capsulolabral injuries, although the risk factors for these intra-articular lesions are unclear. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that patients with posterior instability who had a greater number of instability events would have a higher rate of BCLs compared with patients who had fewer instability episodes. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data from the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Group instability patient cohort were analyzed. Patients aged 12 to 99 years undergoing primary surgical treatment for shoulder instability were included. The glenohumeral joint was evaluated by the treating surgeon at the time of surgery, and patients were classified as having a BCL if they had any grade 3 or 4 glenoid or humeral cartilage lesion, reverse Hill-Sachs lesion, bony Bankart lesion, or glenoid bone loss. The effects of the number of instability events on the presence of BCLs was investigated by use of Fisher exact tests. Logistic regression modeling was performed to investigate the independent contributions of demographic variables and injury-specific variables to the likelihood of having a BCL. Significance was defined as P < .05. Results: We identified 271 patients (223 male) for analysis. Bone and cartilage lesions were identified in 54 patients (19.9%) at the time of surgical treatment. A glenoid cartilage injury was most common and was identified in 28 patients (10.3%). A significant difference was noted between the number of instability events and the presence of BCLs ( P = .025), with the highest rate observed in patients with 2 to 5 instability events (32.3%). Multivariate logistic regression modeling indicated that increasing age ( P = .019) and 2 to 5 reported instability events ( P = .001) were significant independent predictors of the presence of BCLs. For bone lesions alone, the number of instability events was the only significant independent predictor; increased risk of bone lesion was present for patients with 1 instability event (OR, 6.1; P = .012), patients with 2 to 5 instability events (OR, 4.2; P = .033), and patients with more than 5 instability events (OR, 6.0; P = .011). Conclusion: Bone and cartilage lesions are seen significantly more frequently with increasing patient age and in patients with 2 to 5 instability events. Early surgical stabilization for posterior instability may be considered to potentially limit the extent of associated intra-articular injury. The group of patients with more than 5 instability events may represent a different pathological condition, as this group showed a decrease in the likelihood of cartilage injury, although not bony injury.

Previous studies have demonstrated that psychosocial factors and comorbid depression are associated with worse preoperative baseline measures, clinical outcomes, and recovery in patients undergoing shoulder surgery. It is unknown whether this potential link would differ between those with traumatic vs. atraumatic shoulder instability, as symptoms may persist longer in atraumatic instability prior to surgical intervention. The purpose of this study was to determine if psychosocial factors and/or comorbid depression more heavily influence preoperative symptoms for patients with traumatic vs. atraumatic shoulder instability.Prospective baseline data from 1552 patients in the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort were analyzed based on mechanism of injury while controlling for age, sex, and direction of instability. Multivariable linear regressions were performed to determine whether psychological factors (RAND 36 Mental Component Score [MCS], depression diagnosis, Personality Assessment Screener-22) were predictive of preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores in the atraumatic group. The same model was repeated for the traumatic instability group, and the model fit was compared between groups, with P .05 considered statistically significant.Female sex and lower MCS were significantly associated with worse preoperative ASES and WOSI scores for the group with atraumatic instability (ASES RWorse preoperative psychosocial factors were found to be more strongly associated with shoulder-related pain and function for patients with atraumatic instability. Across multiple orthopedic conditions, depression and emotional well-being have been associated with worse preoperative symptoms and inferior postoperative patient-reported outcomes. Despite the stronger and significant association in atraumatic patients, worse psychosocial factors did not have as large an impact as has been seen in other, more chronic conditions such as osteoarthritis or rotator cuff tears. In addition to medically optimizing patients prior to surgery, the current findings identify a subset of shoulder instability patients that may benefit from a behavioral health intervention either prior to surgery or early in the postoperative period to potentially improve postoperative outcomes.

Background: Multiple studies have compared redislocation rates after stabilization and immobilization for patients experiencing a traumatic, first-time anterior shoulder dislocation (ASD). Purpose: To systematically review the literature to compare rates of recurrent instability and subsequent instability surgery in patients undergoing treatment for a first-time ASD with surgical stabilization versus shoulder immobilization. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify level 1 randomized studies that compared outcomes of surgical stabilization versus immobilization for treatment of primary ASD. The following search phrase was used: (glenohumeral OR anterior shoulder) AND (conservative OR nonoperative OR nonsurgical OR physiotherapy) AND (Bankart OR repair OR stabilization OR surgical OR surgery OR arthroscopic OR arthroscopy) AND (instability OR dislocation). Patients with soft tissue disruption alone as well as those with additional minor bony lesions (Hill-Sachs, Bankart) were included. Recurrent instability and subsequent instability surgery rates, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), and range of motion were evaluated. Results: A total of 5 studies met inclusion criteria, including 126 patients undergoing surgical stabilization (mean age, 23.6 years; range, 15.0-39.0 years) and 133 patients undergoing treatment with sling immobilization only (mean age, 23.1 years; range, 15.0-31.0 years). Mean follow-up was 59.7 months. Overall, 6.3% of operative patients experienced recurrent instability at latest follow-up compared with 46.6% of nonoperative patients ( P < .00001). Similarly, 4.0% of operative patients underwent a subsequent instability surgery compared with 30.8% of nonoperative patients ( P < .00001). These same trends were demonstrated when data were isolated to nonoperative patients immobilized in internal rotation. When comparing the operative and nonoperative groups at latest follow-up, 1 study found significantly improved WOSI scores among operative patients ( P = .035) and 1 study found significantly improved abducted external rotation in nonoperative patients ( P = .02). Conclusion: Patients, particularly active men in their 20s and 30s, undergoing treatment for a first-time ASD with a surgical stabilization procedure can be expected to experience significantly lower rates of recurrent instability and a significantly decreased need for a future stabilization procedure when compared with patients treated nonoperatively.

Background: Multiple studies have compared outcomes among patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with autograft versus allograft, but these data are inconsistently reported and long-term outcomes depending on graft type are yet to be determined. Purpose: To perform a systematic review of clinical outcomes after revision ACLR (rACLR) with autograft versus allograft. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify studies that compared the outcomes of patients undergoing rACLR with autograft versus allograft. The search phrase used was autograft allograft revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Graft rerupture rates, return-to-sports rates, anteroposterior laxity, and patient-reported outcome scores (subjective International Knee Documentation Committee, Tegner, Lysholm, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) were evaluated. Results: Eleven studies met inclusion criteria, including 3011 patients undergoing rACLR with autograft (mean age, 28.9 years) and 1238 patients undergoing rACLR with allograft (mean age, 28.0 years). Mean follow-up was 57.3 months. The most common autograft and allograft types were bone–patellar tendon–bone grafts. Overall, 6.2% of patients undergoing rACLR experienced graft retear, including 4.7% in the autograft group and 10.2% in the allograft group ( P < .0001). Among studies that reported return-to-sports rates, 66.2% of patients with an autograft returned to sports as opposed to 45.3% of patients with an allograft ( P = .01). Two studies found significantly greater postoperative knee laxity in the allograft group as compared with the autograft group ( P < .05). Among all patient-reported outcomes, 1 study found 1 significant difference between groups: patients with an autograft had a significantly higher postoperative Lysholm score when compared with patients with an allograft. Conclusion: Patients undergoing revision ACLR with an autograft can be expected to experience lower rates of graft retear, higher rates of return to sports, and less postoperative anteroposterior knee laxity when compared with patients undergoing revision ACLR with an allograft.

Background: Arthroscopic stabilization has been established as a superior treatment option for primary glenohumeral instability when compared with immobilization in internal rotation. However, immobilization in external rotation (ER) has recently gained interest as a viable nonoperative treatment option for patients with shoulder instability. Purpose: To compare the rates of recurrent instability and subsequent surgery in patients undergoing treatment for primary anterior shoulder dislocation with arthroscopic stabilization versus immobilization in ER. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify studies that’evaluated patients being treated for primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation with either arthroscopic stabilization or immobilization in ER. The search phrase used various combinations of the keywords/phrases “primary closed reduction,”“anterior shoulder dislocation,”“traumatic,”“primary,”“treatment,”“management,”“immobilization,”“external rotation,”“surgical,”“operative,”“nonoperative,” and “conservative.” Inclusion criteria included patients undergoing treatment for primary anterior glenohumeral joint dislocation with either immobilization in ER or arthroscopic stabilization. Rates of recurrent instability, subsequent stabilization surgery, return to sports, positive postintervention apprehension tests, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated. Results: The 30 studies that met inclusion criteria included 760 patients undergoing arthroscopic stabilization (mean age, 23.1 years; mean follow-up time, 55.1 months) and 409 patients undergoing immobilization in ER (mean age, 29.8 years; mean follow-up time, 28.8 months). Overall, 8.8% of operative patients experienced recurrent instability at latest follow-up compared with 21.3% of patients who had undergone ER immobilization ( P < .0001). Similarly, 5.7% of operative patients had undergone a subsequent stabilization procedure at latest follow-up compared with 11.3% of patients who had undergone ER immobilization ( P = .0015). A higher rate of return to sports was found in the operative group ( P < .05), but no other differences were found between groups. Conclusion: Patients undergoing arthroscopic treatment for primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation with arthroscopic stabilization can be expected to experience significantly lower rates of recurrent instability and subsequent stabilization procedures compared with patients undergoing ER immobilization.

Background: Some studies have suggested that running increases the risk of knee osteoarthritis (OA), while others believe it serves a protective function. Purpose: To perform an updated systematic review of the literature to determine the effects of running on the development of knee OA. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases to identify studies evaluating the effect of cumulative running on the development of knee OA or chondral damage based on imaging and/or patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The search terms used were “knee AND osteoarthritis AND (run OR running OR runner).” Patients were evaluated based on plain radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and PROs (presence of knee pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index, and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score). Results: Seventeen studies (6 level 2 studies, 9 level 3 studies, and 2 level 4 studies), with 7194 runners and 6947 nonrunners, met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up time was 55.8 months in the runner group and 99.7 months in the nonrunner group. The mean age was 56.2 years in the runner group and 61.6 years in the nonrunner group. The overall percentage of men was 58.5%. There was a significantly higher prevalence of knee pain in the nonrunner group ( P < .0001). Although 1 study found a significantly higher prevalence of osteophytes in the tibiofemoral (TF) and patellofemoral (PF) joints within the runner group, multiple studies found no significant differences in the prevalence of radiographic knee OA (based on TF/PF joint-space narrowing or Kellgren-Lawrence grade) or cartilage thickness on MRI between runners and nonrunners ( P > .05). One study found a significantly higher risk of knee OA progressing to total knee replacement among nonrunners (4.6% vs 2.6%; P = .014). Conclusion: In the short term, running is not associated with worsening PROs or radiological signs of knee OA and may be protective against generalized knee pain.

To understand the perceptions of program directors (PDs) and fellowship applicants regarding the virtual interview process for orthopaedic surgery sports medicine fellowship programs.An anonymous online survey was distributed through the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) to applicants and PDs of orthopaedic surgery sports medicine fellowship programs following the 2020-2021 fellowship application cycle.A total of 40 responses were received from PDs for a response rate of 47% (40 of 85) and 72 responses were received from applicants for a response rate of 27% (72 of 271). All of the surveyed PDs (40/40, 100%) agreed/strongly agreed that the applicant's interview carries significant weight in determining where an applicant is ranked on the match list. Fifty-eight percent (23 of 40) of PDs agreed/strongly agreed that virtual interviews negatively affected their personal connection with the fellowship interviewee. The presence of virtual interviews allowed 80% (57 of 71) of applicants to go on more interviews. Seventy-three percent (51 of 70) of applicants were able to save greater than $5,000 on travel expenses and 63% (25 of 40) of fellowship programs were able to save greater than $2,500 by conducting virtual interviews.Virtual interviews allowed fellowship programs and applicants to complete more interviews, but both PDs and applicants stated that interviewing in-person was important for applicants to meet faculty and tour the institution where they may be spending a year. In contrast, significant financial savings resulted due to the transition to virtual interviews. Finally, both PDs and applicants were in favor of having the option of interviewing virtually, suggesting that virtual interviews may continue to play a role in future application cycles.This study may be valuable to fellowship programs that will continue to implement virtual interviews into future application cycles.

Background: Articular cartilage and meniscal damage are commonly encountered and often treated at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Our understanding of how these injuries and their treatment relate to outcomes of ACLR is still evolving. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess whether articular cartilage and meniscal variables are predictive of 10-year outcomes after ACLR. We hypothesized that articular cartilage lesions and meniscal tears and treatment would be predictors of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) (all 5 subscales), and Marx activity level outcomes at 10-year follow-up after ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study (prognosis); Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Between 2002 and 2008, individuals with ACLR were prospectively enrolled and followed longitudinally using the IKDC, KOOS, and Marx activity score completed at entry, 2, 6, and 10 years. A proportional odds logistic regression model was built incorporating variables from patient characteristics, surgical technique, articular cartilage injuries, and meniscal tears and treatment to determine the predictors (risk factors) of IKDC, KOOS, and Marx outcomes at 10 years. Results: A total of 3273 patients were enrolled (56% male; median age, 23 years at time of enrollment). Ten-year follow-up was obtained on 79% (2575/3273) of the cohort. Incidence of concomitant pathology at the time of surgery consisted of the following: articular cartilage (medial femoral condyle [MFC], 22%; lateral femoral condyle [LFC], 15%; medial tibial plateau [MTP], 4%; lateral tibial plateau [LTP], 11%; patella, 18%; trochlea, 8%) and meniscal pathology (medial, 37%; lateral, 46%). Variables that were predictive of poorer 10-year outcomes included articular cartilage damage in the patellofemoral ( P < .01) and medial ( P < .05) compartments and previous medial meniscal surgery (7% of knees; P < .04). Compared with no meniscal tear, a meniscal injury was not associated with 10-year outcomes. Medial meniscal repair at the time of ACLR was associated with worse 10-year outcomes for 2 of 5 KOOS subscales, while a medial meniscal repair in knees with grade 2 MFC chondrosis was associated with better outcomes on 2 KOOS subscales. Conclusion: Articular cartilage injury in the patellofemoral and medial compartments at the time of ACLR and a history of medial meniscal surgery before ACLR were associated with poorer 10-year ACLR patient-reported outcomes, but meniscal injury present at the time of ACLR was not. There was limited and conflicting association of medial meniscal repair with these outcomes.

The role of graft selection on clinical and functional outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has gained significant attention in the orthopaedic sports medicine community in recent years. Bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and semitendinosus/gracilis hamstring tendon (HT) autografts are 2 of the most commonly used grafts, given their low failure rates, predictable outcomes, and ability to incorporate appropriately at the graft site. However, multiple studies have recently shown each of these graft options to have some potentially less-desirable characteristics in regards to outcomes in specific patient populations. More specifically, in 14- to 25-year-old athletes, HT autografts have been shown to result in decreased rotational stability, decreased return to sport rates, and increased graft failure rates. On the other hand, BPTB autografts can require a prolonged recovery period and have been associated with increased postoperative pain and long-term kneeling pain. HT and BPTB grafts are both excellent grafts; however, it is important to understand the differences in clinical and functional outcomes between these graft options for ACL reconstruction. The characteristics of the graft need to be considered and individualized for each patient who is being treated for an ACL injury.

The clinical efficacy of autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) versus microfracture (MFx) for repair of articular cartilage lesions in the knee has gained significant attention in the orthopaedic sports medicine community in recent years. Bone marrow stimulation with MFx often is considered a first-line treatment option, given the ease and low cost of the procedure, as well as the good short-term outcomes. However, multiple studies have recently shown the outcomes of knee MFx to worsen after 5 years postoperatively, particularly for larger lesions. Because of this, ACI has been proposed as a first-line rather than salvage procedure for focal chondral defects in the knee. Although it is important to understand the differences in clinical outcomes between ACI and MFx at mid-term follow-up, longer-term outcomes need to be further investigated. In addition, it may be more appropriate to focus on the comparison of MFx with newer-generation techniques of chondrocyte implantation matrix-associated ACI rather than a collation of historical 2-step ACI using periosteum and newer techniques.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a procedure that has been increasingly utilized since its inception over 20 years ago. The purpose of this review is to present the most up to date practice and advances to the RTSA literature from the last 5 years. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent literature on RTSA has focused on identifying complications, maximizing outcomes, and determining its cost-effectiveness. RTSA has become a valuable tool in the treatment of various shoulder pathologies from fractures to massive-irreparable rotator cuff tears. Maximizing outcomes, proper patient counseling, and limiting complications are vital to a successful procedure. SUMMARY: RTSA can be a difficult procedure; however, when utilized appropriately, it can be an invaluable tool in the orthopedic surgeon’s armament. Recent evidence suggests, more and more, that RTSA not only provides value to the patient, but it is also cost-effective.

It is imperative that surgeons educate their patients on what to expect following a meniscectomy.A high preinjury activity level, younger age, medial meniscectomy, and smaller meniscal resection play a role in reducing the time until patients are able to return to sport.Improved clinical outcomes ca

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision cohorts continually report lower outcome scores on validated knee questionnaires than primary ACL cohorts at similar time points after surgery. It is unclear how these outcomes are associated with physical activity after physician clearance for return to recreational or competitive sports after ACL revision surgery. Hypotheses: Participants who return to either multiple sports or a singular sport after revision ACL surgery will report decreased knee symptoms, increased activity level, and improved knee function as measured by validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and compared with no sports participation. Multisport participation as compared with singular sport participation will result in similar increased PROMs and activity level. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 1205 patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction were enrolled by 83 surgeons at 52 clinical sites. At the time of revision, baseline data collected included the following: demographics, surgical characteristics, previous knee treatment and PROMs, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaire, Marx activity score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). A series of multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the association of IKDC, KOOS, WOMAC, and Marx Activity Rating Scale scores at 2 years after revision surgery by sports participation category, controlling for known significant covariates. Results: Two-year follow-up was obtained on 82% (986 of 1205) of the original cohort. Patients who reported not participating in sports after revision surgery had lower median PROMs both at baseline and at 2 years as compared with patients who participated in either a single sport or multiple sports. Significant differences were found in the change of scores among groups on the IKDC ( P < .0001), KOOS-Symptoms ( P = .01), KOOS–Sports and Recreation ( P = .04), and KOOS–Quality of Life ( P < .0001). Patients with no sports participation were 2.0 to 5.7 times more likely than multiple-sport participants to report significantly lower PROMs, depending on the specific outcome measure assessed, and 1.8 to 3.8 times more likely than single-sport participants (except for WOMAC-Stiffness, P = .18), after controlling for known covariates. Conclusion: Participation in either a single sport or multiple sports in the 2 years after ACL revision surgery was found to be significantly associated with higher PROMs across multiple validated self-reported assessment tools. During follow-up appointments, surgeons should continue to expect that patients who report returning to physical activity after surgery will self-report better functional outcomes, regardless of baseline activity levels.

Hypothesis and background Male sex has been identified as a risk factor for both primary shoulder dislocation and recurrent instability, and male patients more often undergo surgery for instability. Despite published discrepancies between sexes regarding the incidence and surgical rates of shoulder instability, there is little detail on the differences in presentation, mechanism of injury, and intraoperative findings. The purpose of this study was to explore these differences. Methods Prospective baseline data from 1010 patients in the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort were analyzed for sex-related differences using demographic characteristics, patient-reported outcomes, radiographic findings, intraoperative findings, and surgical procedures performed. Two-tailed t tests and χ2 tests were used to compare the continuous and categorical data, respectively. Patients were categorized using the Frequency, Etiology, Direction, Severity (FEDS) classification system. Results Male patients comprised 81.3% of the cohort. Male patients had a significantly higher rate of traumatic instability and rate of initial instability while playing sports, as well as significantly higher activity scores. Female patients had significantly lower preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, 36-Item Health Survey, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores. No difference in the number of dislocations was found between male and female patients. Intraoperatively, male patients had higher rates of labral pathology and bone loss whereas female patients had higher rates of capsular laxity. These differences resulted in more Latarjet procedures for male patients and more soft-tissue procedures for female patients. Conclusion There are differences between male and female patients in the etiology of their instability, baseline patient-reported outcomes, and associated shoulder pathology, likely reflecting intrinsic and activity-related variation. These differences may influence clinical decision making and patient outcomes.

Background: No consensus is available regarding the optimal choice of bone graft material for bone tunnel augmentation in revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery. Purpose: To compare the outcomes of different bone graft materials for staged revision ACL reconstruction. Study design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were queried through use of the terms anterior cruciate ligament and revision to identify all studies reporting outcomes of bone tunnel grafting in 2-stage revision ACL reconstruction. Data extracted included indications for 2-stage surgery, surgical technique, graft material, time between surgeries, rehabilitation protocols, physical examination findings, patient-reported outcomes, and radiographic and histologic findings. Results: The analysis included 7 studies with a total of 234 patients. The primary outcome in 2 studies was graft incorporation (mean follow-up, 8.8 months), whereas the other 5 studies reported clinical outcomes with follow-up mean ± SD of 4.2 ± 2.1 years. The indication for bone grafting and between-stage protocol varied among studies. Autograft was used in 4 studies: iliac crest bone autograft (ICBG, n = 3) and tibial bone autograft (TBA, n = 1). In 2 studies, the authors investigated the outcomes of allograft: allograft bone matrix (ABM) and allograft bone chips (AC). Finally, 1 study compared ICBG to a synthetic bone substitute. Radiographic evaluation of bone graft integration after the first stage was reported in 4 studies, with an average duration of 4.9 months. In 4 studies, the authors reported the time interval between first and second surgeries, with an average of 6.1 months for ICBG compared with 8.7 months for allogenic and synthetic grafts. Revision ACL graft failure rates were reported by 5 studies, including 1 study with ABM (6.1%), 1 study with AC (8.3%), 1 study with TBA (0%), and 2 studies with ICBG (0% and 2%). Conclusion: The indications for staged ACL reconstruction and the rehabilitation protocol between stages need to be clearly established. The available data indicate that autograft for bone tunnel grafting in 2-stage ACL revision may be associated with a lower risk of revision ACL reconstruction graft failure compared with allograft bone.

Background: Traumatic anterior shoulder instability is a common condition affecting sports participation among young athletes. Clinical outcomes after surgical management may vary according to patient activity level and sport involvement. Overhead athletes may experience a higher rate of recurrent instability and difficulty returning to sport postoperatively with limited previous literature to guide treatment. Purpose: To report the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing primary arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization within the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability Consortium and to identify prognostic factors associated with successful return to sport at 2 years postoperatively. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Overhead athletes undergoing primary arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization as part of the MOON Shoulder Instability Consortium were identified for analysis. Primary outcomes included the rate of recurrent instability, defined as any patient reporting recurrent dislocation or reoperation attributed to persistent instability, and return to sport at 2 years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index and Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic Shoulder and Elbow questionnaire score. Univariate regression analysis was performed to identify patient and surgical factors predictive of return to sport at short-term follow-up. Results: A total of 49 athletes were identified for inclusion. At 2-year follow-up, 31 (63%) athletes reported returning to sport. Of those returning to sport, 22 athletes (45% of the study population) were able to return to their previous levels of competition (nonrefereed, refereed, or professional) in at least 1 overhead sport. Two patients (4.1%) underwent revision stabilization, although 14 (28.6%) reported subjective apprehension or looseness. Age ( P = .87), sex ( P = .82), and baseline level of competition ( P = .37) were not predictive of return to sport. No difference in range of motion in all planes ( P > .05) and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores (78.0 vs 80.1, P = .73) was noted between those who reported returning to sport and those who did not. Conclusion: Primary arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization in overhead athletes is associated with a low rate of recurrent stabilization surgery. Return to overhead athletics at short-term follow-up is lower than that previously reported for the general athletic population.

Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been documented to have worse outcomes than primary ACL reconstruction. The reasons remain varied and not completely understood. METHODS: Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were prospectively enrolled. Data collected included baseline demographics, surgical technique and pathological condition, prescribed rehabilitation instructions, and a series of validated patient-reported outcome instruments. Patients were followed for 2 years and asked to complete a set of outcome instruments identical to those completed at baseline. Subsequent surgical procedures on the ipsilateral knee were recorded. Regression analysis was used to control for age, sex, activity level, baseline outcome scores, and the above-mentioned rehabilitation-related variables in order to assess the factors affecting clinical outcomes 2 years after revision ACL reconstruction. RESULTS: A total of 843 patients met the inclusion criteria and were successfully enrolled, and 82% (695) were followed for 2 years. Two rehabilitation-related factors were found to influence outcome. First, patients who were prescribed an ACL brace for their return to sports had a significantly better Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for sports and recreational activities at 2 years (odds ratio [OR] =1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.07 to 2.11; p = 0.019). Second, patients prescribed an ACL brace for the postoperative rehabilitation period were 2.3 times more likely to have subsequent surgery by 2 years (OR = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.11 to 4.60; p = 0.024). The odds of a graft rerupture were not affected by any type of brace wear. CONCLUSIONS: Rehabilitation-related factors that the physician can control at the time of an ACL reconstruction have the ability to influence clinical outcomes at 2 years. Weight-bearing and motion can be initiated immediately postoperatively. Bracing during the early postoperative period is not helpful. Use of a functional brace early in the postoperative period was associated with an increased risk of a reoperation. Use of a functional brace for a return to sports improved the KOOS on the sports/recreation subscale. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Purpose To systematically review high-quality studies in the literature to compare the postoperative radiographic incidence of knee osteoarthritis (OA) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with a single-bundle (SB) versus double-bundle (DB) graft. Methods A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to locate randomized controlled trials that compared the postoperative progression of knee OA in SB versus DB ACLR patients. The search terms used were “anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction,” “single-bundle,” “double-bundle,” “randomized,” and “osteoarthritis.” Patients were assessed based on radiographic evaluation (Kellgren-Lawrence [K-L] and objective International Knee Documentation Committee scales) and graft failure. Results A total of 7 studies (5 Level I and 2 Level II) met the inclusion criteria, including 375 SB and 477 DB ACLR patients with a mean follow-up period of 5.3 years. Graft failure occurred in 3.2% of patients overall (27 of 852), with no significant difference between groups (P = .10). No significant difference in overall K-L grade distribution was found between groups (P = .90). Overall, 15.1% of patients (58 of 383) were given a K-L grade of 2 or greater, including 14.4% in the SB group (31 of 215) and 16.1% in the DB group (27 of 168) (P = .65). Using other, unconventional grading schemes, 2 studies found DB ACLR patients to have significantly fewer signs of radiographic knee OA at follow-up compared with SB ACLR patients (P Conclusions Patients undergoing ACLR with either an SB or DB graft can be expected to experience a similar incidence of postoperative knee OA at midterm follow-up according to the K-L grading system. Level of Evidence Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.