Search

Tears of the quadriceps or patellar tendon usually occur after a sudden eccentric contraction and are diagnosed by a palpable gap at the injury site combined with inability to perform a straight leg raise. Bilateral knee radiographs may demonstrate patella alta with patellar tendon tears and patella baja with quadriceps tendon tears when compared to the uninjured knee. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging can be helpful when there is uncertainty in the diagnosis. Surgical treatment is indicated for complete tears and some high-grade partial tears. Nonabsorbable high-strength sutures or suture tape are placed in running locking fashion along the injured tendon and secured to the patella with bone tunnels (i.e. transosseous) or suture anchors. The transosseous technique requires exposure of the length of the patella in order to drill three bone tunnels to shuttle the sutures and tie over either pole of the patella. The suture anchor technique allows for a smaller incision and less soft tissue dissection and may utilize a knotted or knotless technique. Biomechanical testing with load to failure is not statistically different between the transosseous and anchor techniques, although anchors have been shown to have less gap formation at the repair site. Repair augmentation with a graft may be beneficial in mid-substance injuries, chronic tears, and in cases of compromised tissue quality. Rehabilitation can usually be initiated immediately with protected weight bearing in an orthosis, safe-zone knee passive range of motion, and avoidance of active extension. After a period of 6 weeks, rehabilitation can progress with full range of motion and a concentric strengthening program.

In the past decade, the number of hip arthroscopy procedures has exponentially increased, primarily for the treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome and labral lesions. As the techniques have evolved, so has the acknowledgment of the potential complications, including iatrogenic instability that may result from soft-tissue laxity, subtle dysplastic morphologies, or residual defects from capsulotomies in which the capsular closure is insufficient. In most cases, direct capsular repair or plication can be performed at the conclusion of the procedure; however, larger defects, poor-quality tissue, or cases of gross ligamentous laxity may require reconstruction or augmentation. In such instances, several options exist. The purpose of this technical note is to describe a capsular repair augmentation with a bioinductive implant during revision hip arthroscopy.

Femoral anteversion may be a protective factor for hip impingement, whereas hip arthroscopy outcomes are worse for patients with femoral retroversion. Changes in version also affect the location of impingement. The association of increased anteversion with cam lesions may also explain the high number of patients with asymptomatic cam lesions. Thus, some patients may have large α angles but be asymptomatic. Finally, although femoral version is important, it must be considered in the setting of the patient's acetabular morphology. There is a complex interplay of femoral and acetabular morphologies.

Half of adults will experience knee pain at some point during their lives, resulting in approximately 4 million primary care office visits in the USA annually.1 The majority of these visits for knee pain evaluation are due to osteoarthritis (OA).2 As of 2015, it was estimated that 14 million people in the USA have symptomatic knee OA,3 and this number is expected to increase to up to 28 million over the next decade.4 One of the most common factors that can initiate the cascade of knee OA is meniscus tears.5 Meniscus root tears are a specific type of meniscal injury that have gained attention over the past 5 years and have been reported to account for 10%–21% of all meniscal tears, affecting nearly 100 000 patients annually.6–8 Untreated meniscal root tears have been reported to result in altered joint biomechanics and accelerated articular cartilage degeneration. In this regard, the ‘recently’ recognised pathology of meniscal root tears has been reported to precipitously worsen articular cartilage degeneration (figure 1), cause painful bone oedema and lead to progressive OA (figure 2) if left untreated.9–13 Furthermore, it is important to recognise the association of meniscal injuries leading to subchondral insufficiency and potentially spontaneous osteonecrosis of the knee (SONK). Previously, SONK was a pathology often diagnosed as an ‘idiopathic’ osteonecrosis of the knee prior to the recognition that this pathology was caused by a meniscal tear.9 13–15 However, the pathogenesis of SONK continues to be debated in the literature with many aetiologies, including certain meniscal tears and meniscectomy, reported to be the primary cause of insufficiency fracture development. It was recently reported that the term SONK is a misrepresentation of the aetiology and pathogenesis of the condition, and should be replaced with ‘subchondral insufficiency fractures of the knee’ (SIFK).16 Figure 1 Sagittal (A) and …

Background:Medial meniscus root tears are a common knee injury and can lead to accelerated osteoarthritis, which might ultimately result in a total knee replacement.Purpose:To compare meniscus repair, meniscectomy, and nonoperative treatment approaches among middle-aged patients in terms of osteoarthritis development, total knee replacement rates (clinical effectiveness), and cost-effectiveness.Study Design:Meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.Methods:A systematic literature search was conducted. Progression to osteoarthritis was pooled and meta-analyzed. A Markov model projected strategy-specific costs and disutilities in a cohort of 55-year-old patients presenting with a meniscus root tear without osteoarthritis at baseline. Failure rates of repair and meniscectomy procedures and disutilities associated with osteoarthritis, total knee replacement, and revision total knee replacement were accounted for. Utilities, costs, and event rates were based on literature and public databases. Analyses considered a time frame between 5 years and lifetime and explored the effects of parameter uncertainty.Results:Over 10 years, meniscus repair, meniscectomy, and nonoperative treatment led to 53.0%, 99.3%, and 95.1% rates of osteoarthritis and 33.5%, 51.5%, and 45.5% rates of total knee replacement, respectively. Meta-analysis confirmed lower osteoarthritis and total knee replacement rates for meniscus repair versus meniscectomy and nonoperative treatment. Discounted 10-year costs were $22,590 for meniscus repair, as opposed to $31,528 and $25,006 for meniscectomy and nonoperative treatment, respectively; projected quality-adjusted life years were 6.892, 6.533, and 6.693, respectively, yielding meniscus repair to be an economically dominant strategy. Repair was either cost-effective or dominant when compared with meniscectomy and nonoperative treatment across a broad range of assumptions starting from 5 years after surgery.Conclusion:Repair of medial meniscus root tears, as compared with total meniscectomy and nonsurgical treatment, leads to less osteoarthritis and is a cost-saving intervention. While small confirmatory randomized clinical head-to-head trials are warranted, the presented evidence seems to point relatively clearly toward adopting meniscus repair as the preferred initial intervention for medial meniscus root tears.

Arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement is increasingly common with established clinical success. As with other chronic injuries, there is an emotional impact that can affect recovery, particularly in competitive athletes. As this emotional aspect of injury is more recognized, it will be important to determine comprehensive means of treating both an athlete's physical and mental health. It is important to establish preoperative expectations. For certain patients, psychological evaluation and treatment is indicated early in the diagnosis and recovery to ensure mental fitness, and this may be especially true for adolescents. A comprehensive and personalized approach to injury recovery is optimal.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly being used in today's rapidly evolving health care environment. The value of care provision emphasizes the highest quality of care at the lowest cost. Quality is in the eye of the beholder, with different stakeholders prioritizing different components of the value equation. At the center of the discussion are the patients and their quantification of outcome via PROs. There are hundreds of different PRO questionnaires that may ascertain an individual's overall general health, quality of life, activity level, or determine a body part-, joint-, or disease-specific outcome. As providers and patients increasingly measure outcomes, there exists greater potential to identify significant differences across time points due to an intervention. In other words, if you compare groups enough, you are bound to eventually detect a significant difference. However, the characterization of significance is not purely dichotomous, as a statistically significant outcome may not be clinically relevant. Statistical significance is the direct result of a mathematical equation, irrelevant to the patient experience. In clinical research, despite detecting statistically significant pre- and post-treatment differences, patients may or may not be able to perceive those differences. Thresholds exist to delineate whether those differences are clinically important or relevant to patients. PROs are unique, with distinct parameters of clinical importance for each outcome score. This review highlights the most common PROs in clinical research and discusses the salient pearls and pitfalls. In particular, it stresses the difference between statistical and clinical relevance and the concepts of minimal clinically important difference and patient acceptable symptom state. Researchers and clinicians should consider clinical importance in addition to statistical significance when interpreting and reporting investigation results.

Like many areas of medicine, the role of arthroscopy is evolving and its use must be guided by critical analysis of the scientific evidence. Data evaluating arthroscopic knee surgery is complex with heterogenous pathology, patient populations and techniques and, therefore, must be interpreted with care. Attention-grabbing headlines and animations can stimulate discussion, but when key aspects of published science are overlooked, they risk oversimplification. We believe a number of articles published in a recent edition of the British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) represent examples where science may be overshadowed by oversimplification. Thus, we offer additional insights to focus the place of arthroscopy in the management of joint problems. To our interpretation, recent BJSM publications appear to take an emotional stance, indicating that all arthroscopy for conditions that cause joint pain is bad and should be stopped.1 2 Following an article reporting a decline in the rate of arthroscopy in Finland,3 Ardern et al provided a provocative editorial citing reasons for this change as reduced reimbursement, medical overuse and grass roots pressure.1 Scientific evidence was not one of the five reasons given directly. An editorial by Engebretsen and Moatshe4 in the same edition provides a more balanced discussion on the 5-year results of the Finnish Degenerative Meniscus Lesion Study (FIDELITY) trial also published in the same issue.5 This editorial contends that the conclusion by Sihvonen and colleagues that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is associated with a greater risk of osteoarthritis is too strong for the data presented.4 They also point out that patients …

It is well known that key features of femoral acetabular impingement syndrome include labrum tears. These tears often are caused by elevation of the labrum off the acetabulum. However, another common cause of labrum tears is traumatic injuries from either low- or high-energy mechanisms. It is commonly thought that traumatic labrum tears may have different outcomes than the atraumatic tears. However, recent studies now show that traumatic labrum tears have equivalent outcomes to atraumatic groups even when including the worker's compensation population.

Golf is a common recreational and competitive sport that requires full hip rotation to allow for a smooth and effective swing. Therefore hip impingement and hip osteoarthritis, by limiting rotation, could cause pain in golfers and even encourage them to discontinue the sport. In my opinion, the lead hip in golfers is likely what generally drives the symptoms in the hip, back, or knee. After surgical correction, golfers are able to get back to golf and many experience improved performance.

Three-dimensional (3D) printing has recently expanded in popularity, and become the cutting edge of tissue engineering research. A growing emphasis from clinicians on patient-specific care, coupled with an increasing knowledge of cellular and biomaterial interaction, has led researchers to explore new methods that enable the greatest possible control over the arrangement of cells and bioactive nanomaterials in defined scaffold geometries. In this light, the cutting edge technology of 3D printing also enables researchers to more effectively compose multi-material and cell-laden scaffolds with less effort. In this review, we explore the current state of 3D printing with a focus on printing of nanomaterials and their effect on various complex tissue regeneration applications.

As surgeons advance the field of hip arthroscopy and perform more hip arthroscopy in patients with hip dysplasia and associated femoroacetabular impingement, we need to publish more outcome studies to determine this procedure's success and safety in this specific group of patients.

Background: Prior studies have suggested that anatomic double-bundle (DB) posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (PCLR) reduces residual laxity compared with the intact state better than single-bundle PCLR. Although the anterolateral bundle (ALB) and posteromedial bundle (PMB) reportedly act codominantly, few studies have compared commonly used graft fixation angles and the influence that graft fixation angles have on overall graft forces and knee laxity. Hypothesis: Graft fixation angle combinations of 0°/75° (PMB/ALB), 0°/90°, 0°/105°, 15°/75°, 15°/90°, and 15°/105° would significantly reduce knee laxity from the sectioned PCL state while preventing in vitro graft forces from being overloaded between any of the graft fixation angles. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Nine cadaveric knees were evaluated for the kinematics of the intact, PCL-sectioned, and DB PCLR techniques. The DB technique was varied by fixing the PMB and ALB grafts at the following 6 randomly ordered fixation angle combinations: 0°/75° (PMB/ALB), 0°/90°, 0°/105°, 15°/75°, 15°/90°, and 15°/105°. A 6 degrees of freedom robotic testing system subjected each specimen to an applied 134-N posterior tibial load at 0° to 120° of flexion and 5-N·m external, 5-N·m internal, and 10-N·m valgus rotation torques applied at 60°, 75°, 90°, 105°, and 120° of flexion. The ALB and PMB grafts were fixed to load cells that concurrently measured graft forces throughout kinematic testing. t tests compared the kinematics between groups, and 2-factor models assessed the contribution of ALB and PMB grafts after DB PCLR ( P < .05). Results: Consistently, DB PCLR significantly reduced posterior translation compared with the sectioned PCL and was comparable with the intact state during applied posterior tibial loads at flexion angles of greater than 90°; a mean residual laxity of 1.5 mm remained compared with the intact state during applied posterior tibial loads. Additionally, fixing the PMB graft at 15° resulted in significantly larger PMB graft forces compared with fixation at 0° during applied posterior loading, internal rotation, external rotation, and valgus rotation. Similarly, fixing the ALB graft at 75° resulted in significantly larger ALB graft forces compared with fixation of the ALB graft at 90° or 105° during all loading conditions. Conclusion: Fixation of the PMB graft at 0° to 15° and the ALB graft at 75° to 105° during DB PCLR were successful in significantly reducing knee laxity from the sectioned state. However, fixation of the PMB graft at 15° versus 0° resulted in significantly increased loads through the PMB graft, and fixation of the ALB graft at 75° versus 90° or 105° resulted in significantly increased loads through the ALB graft. Clinical Relevance: This study found that all 6 fixation angle combinations significantly improved knee kinematics compared with the sectioned state at time zero; however, it is recommended that fixation of the PMB graft be performed at 0° because of the significant increases in PMB graft loading that occur with fixation at 15° and that fixation of the ALB graft be performed at 90° or 105° rather than 75° to minimize ALB graft forces, which could lead to graft attenuation or failure over time.

© ISAKOS 2017. All rights reserved. This book is a comprehensive journey through the pathogenesis and treatment of meniscal pathology. It details the elements that are necessary to properly understand, diagnose, and treat meniscal tears, ranging from vertical tears to radial tears and root avulsions. Treatment techniques are thoroughly described and illustrated, with presentation of the latest evidence on outcomes. The algorithmic treatment of meniscal tears has undergone a rapid transformation. We have progressed from the initial treatments involving removal of the meniscus using an open technique, to the performance of partial meniscectomies and complex meniscal repairs by means of an arthroscopic technique. The current treatment goal is to maintain the biology and mechanical integrity of this vital knee structure, an aim too often disregarded by past generations of surgeons. An explosion of new knowledge, coupled with advances in arthroscopic and surgical technology, has paved the way for wider application of approaches that help to preserve the meniscus, in the hope of preventing or delaying the development of knee arthritis. This book will have utility for all clinicians who treat meniscal lesions and will serve as a valuable resource for years to come.

The inside-out repair technique is the gold standard for meniscus repair. By creating a small open approach to the knee capsule, the meniscus from the middle portion to posterior portion can be safely accessed and repaired. Furthermore, this technique can be applied to multiple different tear types, as determined by both morphology and anatomic location. We review the inside-out technique for meniscal repair, including indications, benefits, complications, outcomes, and a detailed description of how to safely and successfully execute the procedure.

Electronic health records (EHRs) that include computerized provider order entry (CPOE) have the potential to reduce medical errors and adverse drug events, improve health outcomes and reduce health care costs. The success of CPOE is dependent upon the development of standardized evidence-based order sets and care pathways that are developed and used by clinical providers. However, development is dependent upon the engagement and clinical expertise of health care providers who are busy caring for patients and may not have the time or resources to devote to order set development. This paper describes one academic institution's experience in adopting a new EHR that includes CPOE and the efforts to stimulate the development of order set content throughout all clinical sections and departments. Based on this experience, specific recommendations and guidance to facilitate the development of evidence-based order set and care pathway content are described in the article. Through the use of the described strategies and techniques, over a three-year period the institution developed, approved and implemented 495 order sets authored by 141 different providers and well exceeded the established goals of the committee and institution.

A previous hip fracture more than doubles the risk of a contralateral hip fracture. Pharmacologic and environmental interventions to prevent hip fracture have documented poor compliance. The purpose of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of prophylactic fixation of the uninjured hip to prevent contralateral hip fracture.: A Markov state-transition model was used to evaluate the cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for unilateral fixation of hip fracture alone (including internal fixation or arthroplasty) compared with unilateral fixation and contralateral prophylactic hip fixation performed at the time of hip fracture or unilateral fixation and bilateral hip pad protection. Prophylactic fixation involved placement of a cephalomedullary nail in the uninjured hip and was initially assumed to have a relative risk of a contralateral fracture of 1%. Health states included good health, surgery-related complications requiring a second operation (infection, osteonecrosis, nonunion, and malunion), fracture of the uninjured hip, and death. The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimated as cost per QALY gained in 2006 US dollars with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios below $50,000 per QALY gained considered cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the impact of patient age, annual mortality and complication rates, intervention effectiveness, utilities, and costs on the value of prophylactic fixation.: In the baseline analysis, in a 79-year-old woman, prophylactic fixation was not found to be cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $142,795/QALY). However, prophylactic fixation was found to be a cost-effective method to prevent contralateral hip fracture in: 1) women 71 to 75 years old who had 30% greater relative risk for a contralateral fracture; and 2) women younger than age 70 years. Cost-effectiveness was greater when the additional costs of prophylaxis were less than $6000. However, for most analyses, the success of prophylactic fixation was highly sensitive to the effectiveness and the relative morbidity and mortality of the additional procedure.: Prophylactic fixation with a cephalomedullary nail was not found to be cost-effective for the average older woman who sustained a hip fracture. However, it may be appropriate for select patient populations. The study supports the need for basic science and clinical trials investigating the effectiveness of prophylactic fixation for patient populations at higher lifetime risk for contralateral hip fracture.

The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial showed an overall advantage for operative compared with nonoperative treatment of lumbar disc herniations. Because a recent randomized trial showed no benefit for operative treatment of a disc at the lumbosacral junction (L5-S1), we reviewed subgroups within the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial to assess the effect of herniation level on outcomes of operative and nonoperative care.The combined randomized and observation cohorts of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial were analyzed by actual treatment received stratified by level of disc herniation. Overall, 646 L5-S1 herniations, 456 L4-L5 herniations, and eighty-eight upper lumbar (L2-L3 or L3-L4) herniations were evaluated. Primary outcome measures were the Short Form-36 bodily pain and physical functioning scales and the modified Oswestry Disability Index assessed at six weeks, three months, six months, one year, and two years. Treatment effects (the improvement in the operative group minus the improvement in the nonoperative group) were estimated with use of longitudinal regression models, adjusting for important covariates.At two years, patients with upper lumbar herniations (L2-L3 or L3-L4) showed a significantly greater treatment effect from surgery than did patients with L5-S1 herniations for all outcome measures: 24.6 and 7.1, respectively, for bodily pain (p = 0.002); 23.4 and 9.9 for Short Form-36 physical functioning (p = 0.014); and -19 and -10.3 for Oswestry Disability Index (p = 0.033). There was a trend toward greater treatment effect for surgery at L4-L5 compared with L5-S1, but this was significant only for the Short Form-36 physical functioning subscale (p = 0.006). Differences in treatment effects between the upper lumbar levels and L4-L5 were significant for Short Form-36 bodily pain only (p = 0.018).The advantage of operative compared with nonoperative treatment varied by herniation level, with the smallest treatment effects at L5-S1, intermediate effects at L4-L5, and the largest effects at L2-L3 and L3-L4. This difference in effect was mainly a result of less improvement in patients with upper lumbar herniations after nonoperative treatment.

Background: Currently, no consensus exists for the optimal graft fixation angle for anatomic single-bundle (SB) posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions (PCLRs). Additionally, direct graft forces have not been measured. Alternative graft fixation angles and the resultant graft forces should be investigated to optimize the stability of SB PCLRs without overconstraining the knee. Hypothesis: Graft fixation angles of 75°, 90°, and 105° for SB PCLR were hypothesized to improve knee stability compared with the sectioned posterior cruciate ligament state with no evidence of knee overconstraint. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Nine fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees were biomechanically evaluated for the intact, sectioned, and SB PCLR states with the anterolateral bundle graft fixed at 75°, 90°, and 105°. A 6 degrees of freedom robotic system assessed knee laxity with a 134-N posterior load applied at 0° to 120° and 5-N·m external, 5-N·m internal, and 10-N·m valgus rotation torques applied at 60° to 120°. By securing the graft to an external load cell, graft forces were measured throughout kinematic testing. Results: No significant kinematic differences were found among the 3 fixation angles. Each fixation angle resulted in significantly less posterior translation than in the sectioned state at all flexion angles ( P < .05), with 4.1 mm of average residual laxity during an applied posterior loading. For all graft fixation angles, internal rotation was significantly increased between 60° and 120° of flexion, and external rotation was significantly increased at 90°, 105°, and 120° of flexion compared with the intact state. Graft forces were not significantly different among the 3 fixation angles and remained below reported loads observed during activities of daily living. Conclusion: All tested SB PCLR graft fixation angles restored knee laxity to similar levels; however, persistent laxity resulted in significant increases in knee laxity compared with the intact state during posterior tibial loading at all flexion angles, internal rotation at flexion angles ≥60°, and external rotation at ≥75° of flexion. Clinical Relevance: The results of this study suggest that SB PCL graft fixation angles of 75°, 90°, and 105° were comparable in restoring knee kinematics and exposed the graft to similar time-zero loads. However, SB PCLRs did not fully reduce knee laxity to the intact state.

Purpose The purposes of this study were (1) to construct a theoretical Markov decision model to compare the total remaining quality-adjusted life-years following either arthroscopic management (AM) or total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis and (2) to determine the possible effects of age on the preferred treatment strategy. Methods A Markov decision model was constructed to compare AM and TSA in patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis. The rates of surgical complications, revision surgery, and death were derived from the literature and analyzed. The principal outcome measure was the mean total remaining quality-adjusted life-years after each treatment strategy. Sensitivity analyses were performed for age at the initial procedure, utilities, and transition probabilities. Results This theoretical decision model showed that AM was the preferred strategy for patients younger than 47 years, TSA was the preferred strategy for patients older than 66 years, and both treatment strategies were reasonable for patients aged between 47 and 66 years. The model was highly sensitive to age at the index surgery, utilities of wellness states, survivorship, and the probability of failure after either AM or TSA. Conclusions According to this theoretical decision model, AM was the preferred treatment strategy for patients younger than 47 years, primary TSA was the preferred treatment strategy for patients older than 66 years, and both treatment options were reasonable for patients aged between 47 and 66 years. Level of Evidence Level II, economic and decision analysis.

Femoral shaft fractures are usually treated with anterograde or retrograde nails that typically do not provide femoral neck fixation. Ipsilateral femoral neck fractures occur with 2.5%-10% of femoral shaft fractures; 19%-55% of associated femoral neck fractures are missed with plain films and 5%-22% with computed tomography (CT). This study was performed to determine if routine reconstruction nailing of all femoral shaft fractures with or without occult femoral neck fractures is cost effective.A decision tree model examined the cost effectiveness of reconstruction nailing over standard intramedullary nailing for all femoral shaft fractures in which an associated femoral neck fracture was not identified on plain radiographs. As a base model, we assumed that 5% of shaft fractures had an ipsilateral femoral neck fracture, and 37% were missed and required further surgery. We assigned a small morbidity and additional cost ($680) for the use of a reconstruction nail and 2 screws. Model inputs including costs, clinical outcome probabilities, and health utilities were derived from the literature, estimated from institutional data, or assumed by the authors. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the effect of the rate of associated femoral neck fracture, the rate of missed femoral neck fracture, the complication rate of reconstruction screws, the cost of the extra reconstruction screws, and the utilities of each outcome on the incremental cost effectiveness (ICER) of both strategies. Current practice in cost-effectiveness analysis uses a threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained as cost effective. A secondary analysis of the use CT scans to reduce missed femoral neck fractures was also performed.The base model showed that the placement of reconstruction nails in all isolated femur fractures was not cost effective. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the ICER was most sensitive to the cost of the reconstruction nail, hemiarthroplasty, and a missed femoral neck fracture. The ICER was affected by the rate of femoral neck fracture and the rate of missed femoral neck fracture. If the rate of missed femoral neck fractures was38%, then reconstruction nailing was a cost-effective strategy. If the probability of an ipsilateral femoral neck fracture was7%, then reconstruction nailing was cost effective. Protocolized CT scans had an ICER$100,000. If the additional cost of the reconstruction nails was$650, then it was cost effective to perform reconstruction nailing for all femoral shaft fractures.Reconstruction nailing of femoral shaft fractures can be a cost-effective method to reduce the risks and morbidity of missed femoral neck fractures if the incremental implant costs are$650. Routine reconstruction nailing is cost effective if the rate of associated femoral neck fracture is7% or the rate of missed femoral neck fracture is38%. CT scans are not a cost-effective strategy to reduce the risk and morbidity of missed femoral neck fractures if the cost is$243. Weaknesses of this study include the reliance on low-powered studies and on estimations of some utilities and costs. To prevent the morbidity of missed or occult femoral neck fractures, the use of reconstruction nails for femoral shaft fractures is cost effective when the incremental costs of implants are$650.Economic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, despite being one of the most common surgical interventions, is also one of the least agreed upon surgeries when it comes to optimum graft choice. Three graft choices stand among the most widely used in this procedure: (1) bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft (BPTB), (2) quadruple hamstring tendon autograft (HS), and (3) allograft. Hypothesis: Bone–patellar tendon–bone ACL reconstruction is the most cost-effective method of ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A simplified decision tree model was created with theoretical patients assigned equally to 1 of 3 ACL reconstruction cohorts based on graft type. These treatment arms were further divided into outcome arms based on probabilities from the literature. The terminal outcomes were assigned a health state/utility score and a societal cost. Utilities were calculated from real clinic patients via the time trade-off questionnaire. Costs were literature based. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $50 000/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) was used as the threshold for cost-effectiveness. Results: Hamstring tendon autograft was the least costly ($5375/surgery) and most effective (0.912) graft choice, dominating both BPTB and allograft reconstructions. Allograft was both the most costly and least effective strategy for the average patient undergoing ACL reconstruction. However, if baseline costs of BPTB could be reduced (by $500) or the effectiveness increased (anterior knee pain 29% or revision rates >7%), then BPTB also became incrementally cost-effective. Conclusions: This model suggests that hamstring autograft ACL reconstruction is the most cost-effective method of surgery for the average patient with ACL deficiency. However, specific clinical scenarios that change postoperative probabilities of the different complications may sway surgeons to choose either allografts or BPTB. Cost-effectiveness analysis is not intended to replace individual clinician judgment but rather is intended to examine both the effectiveness and costs associated with theoretical groups undergoing specific multifactorial decisions.

Rupture of the coracobrachialis muscle is extremely rare; to the best of our knowledge, rupture of this muscle from indirect, nonpenetrating trauma has yet to be reported1,2. This case report describes a distal coracobrachialis rupture that was caused by indirect trauma. Because of the progression of the injury and its clinical presentation, along with the rarity of a coracobrachialis rupture, the patient was initially diagnosed with a distal biceps tendon rupture at an outside institution, which delayed treatment. The coracobrachialis muscle functions as a flexor of the shoulder. Additionally, it serves as an adductor and internal rotator of the shoulder and stabilizes the shoulder joint when the arm is at the side. It inserts via a flat tendon in the middle third of the humerus, between the origins of the brachialis and triceps muscles3. It is important to be aware of the rare rupture of the coracobrachialis muscle because it may be misdiagnosed as a distal biceps tendon rupture. We aim to emphasize the importance of recognizing this unusual injury and to present a surgical treatment option. The patient was informed that data concerning the case would be submitted for publication, and he provided consent. A forty-one-year-old oil rig worker was lifting a heavy piece of equipment by elevating his arm and flexing his elbow when the machine suddenly jerked. He felt a tearing sensation and had substantial pain and deformity in the right arm. Initially, he was seen by an emergency physician, who diagnosed a distal biceps tendon rupture because of the bulging deformity at the medial aspect of the upper arm, as well as weakness and pain during elbow flexion. He did poorly with nonoperative treatment and was referred to an orthopaedic surgeon for consultation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the right …