Labott, Joshua R.

Background: Greater trochanteric (GT) fractures after total hip arthroplasty (THA) are typically managed nonoperatively. However, outcome data for patient counseling remain limited. We evaluated the nonoperative results, focusing on fracture union rates and the presence of persistent limp in relation with fracture location, displacement magnitude, and direction. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 82 postoperative GT fractures not associated with trochanteric osteolysis following primary THA performed between 1984 and 2020. The mean follow-up was 9 years. Fracture location was classified relative to the contralateral lesser trochanter as tip, waist, or base. Initial displacement, migration, final displacement, and bony union were assessed radiographically. Clinical outcomes included the presence of a persistent limp and Harris Hip Score. Multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with nonunion and limp. Results: Fractures were classified as tip (n = 32), waist (n = 29), or base (n = 21). The mean initial displacement was 8.9 mm, with 43% displaced >10 mm. Initial displacement was significantly lower in base fractures (4.8 mm) compared with tip (10.1 mm) or waist (10.8 mm) fractures (p < 0.05). The mean final displacement was 14.6 mm. 45% of fractures achieved complete bony union, and 38% of patients demonstrated a persistent limp. In multivariable analysis, greater final displacement (>12 mm), and tip and waist fractures were independently associated with nonunion. Posterior fracture displacement was significantly associated with persistent limp. Conclusions: Outcomes following nonoperative management of GT fractures after THA depend on fracture morphology and displacement characteristics. Tip and waist fractures and fractures with final displacement >12 mm have a higher risk of nonunion, whereas posterior and superior displacement is associated with persistent limp. Greater than 20 mm of displacement is associated with both limp and nonunion. These findings may assist surgeons in counseling patients and in identifying fracture patterns at higher risk for adverse outcomes of nonoperative management. Level of Evidence: Level III (Prognostic Study). See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Introduction: Manual measurement of leg length (LL) and offset can be tedious. This study developed an automated algorithm for measuring LL and offset from pre- and postoperative AP pelvis radiographs in a large cohort of THA patients. Methods: Using a deep learning model trained on 1100 total AP pelvis radiographs, an algorithm was developed to calculate LL and offset. Algorithm measurements were compared with manual measurements by 4 raters on a sample of 100 pre- and postoperative image pairs. Inter- and intra-rater consistency was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The algorithm was applied to calculate the pre- and postoperative LL and offset discrepancies and the change in LL and offset bilaterally in a cohort of 15,951 image pairs. Results: ICC values between the algorithm and human raters ranged from 0.83 to 0.88 for offset measurements and 0.92 to 0.97 for LL measurements. Human raters demonstrated good-to-excellent inter-rater ICC and uniformly excellent intra-rater ICC. Entire database measurements demonstrated shorter LLs for arthritic joints versus the contralateral leg preoperatively and reduced LL discrepancy post-arthroplasty. Conclusions: We present a deep learning algorithm for calculating LL and offset using AP pelvis radiographs. This tool can support population-level studies and may assist operative management.

AimsPrevious studies have highlighted differences in the risk of periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty with either a cemented taper slip (TS) stem or a composite beam (CB) stem. This biomechanical study explored the occurrence of PPF around these stems, and the protective effect of adding a 16-gauge prophylactic calcar or diaphyseal wire to the TS stems to increase the resistance to torque as a potential way to prevent these fractures.MethodsA total of 21 TS stems (eight alone, six with calcar wiring, and seven with diaphyseal wiring placed 2 cm distal to the lesser trochanter) and seven CB stems were cemented into standard sawbones. The peak torque at failure was measured using a servohydraulic test machine, and the fracture location was recorded. An a priori power analysis determined that seven specimens per group were needed to detect a 30 Nm difference with 90% power, assuming a 14.8 Nm SD in peak torque between groups. Comparisons were performed using paired t-tests.ResultsCB stems exhibited a significantly higher mean peak torque at failure (205.3 Nm (SD 26.9)) than TS stems (159.5 Nm (SD 17.4); p = 0.012), calcar-wired TS (148.2 Nm (SD 38.6); p = 0.031), and diaphyseal-wired TS (164.9 Nm (SD 21.5); p = 0.027). This study did not demonstrate that wired-TS stems had a higher peak torque at failure than non-wired TS stems. Additionally, calcar wiring was not found to be stronger than diaphyseal wiring (p = 0.400). Four CB fractures occurred distal to the stem, whereas all TS fractures occurred at the mid-stem, simulating a Vancouver type B fracture. Interestingly, adding the diaphyseal wire shifted the fracture location more distally in four of the seven stems (p = 0.070).ConclusionIn this model, CB stems had greater resistance to torque than TS stems, which may explain the lower risk of PPF. Adding calcar or diaphyseal wires to the TS stems resulted in no significant change in peak torque to fracture. CB cemented stems should be considered in patients at high risk of PPF.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2025;107-B(5 Supple A):32–37.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) can be successful in restoring knee stability. However, secondary ACL injury, either through graft failure or contralateral injury, is a known complication and can significantly impact the ability of a patient to return successfully to previous activities. Purpose: To develop and internally validate an interpretable machine learning model to quantify the risk of graft failure and contralateral ACL injury in a longitudinal cohort treated with ACLR. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: An established geographic database of >600,000 patients was used to identify patients with a diagnosis of ACL rupture between 1990 and 2016 with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Medical records were reviewed for relevant patient information and 4 candidate machine learning algorithms were evaluated for prediction of graft failure and contralateral ACL injury in patients after ACLR as identified either on magnetic resonance imaging or via arthroscopy. Performance of the algorithms was assessed through discrimination, calibration, and decision curve analysis. Model interpretability was enhanced utilizing global variable importance plots and partial dependence curves. Results: A total of 1497 patients met inclusion criteria. Among them, 140 (9.4%) had graft failure and 128 (8.6%) had a contralateral ACL injury after index surgery at a median follow-up of 140.7 months (interquartile range, 77.2-219.2 months). The best performing models achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.70 for prediction of graft failure and 0.67 for prediction of contralateral ACL injury, outperforming a logistic regression fitted on the identical feature set. Notable predictors for increased risk of graft failure included younger age at injury, body mass index (BMI) <30, return to sports <13 months, initial time to surgery >75 days, utilization of allograft, femoral/tibial fixation with suspension/expansion devices, concomitant collateral ligament injury, and active or former smoking history. Predictors of contralateral ACL injury included greater preoperative pain, younger age at initial injury, BMI <30, active smoking history, initial time to surgery >75 days, history of contralateral knee arthroscopies, and involvement in contact sports. Conclusion: Less than 18% of all patients who undergo ACLR should be expected to sustain either a graft failure or contralateral ACL injury. Machine learning models outperformed logistic regression and identified greater preoperative pain, younger age, BMI <30, earlier return to higher activity, and time to surgical intervention >75 days as common risk factors for both graft failure as well as contralateral ACL injury after ACLR. Surgeon-modifiable risk factors for graft failure included allograft and femoral/tibial fixation with a suspension/expansion combination.

Previous studies have highlighted differences in the risk of periprosthetic fracture between tapered slip (TS) and composite beam (CB) stems. This biomechanical study explored periprosthetic fractures around these stems and the effect of adding a 16-gauge calcar or diaphyseal wire to TS stems on their resistance to torque.A power analysis determined a sample size of 7 specimens per group, assuming a standard deviation of 14.8 Nm in peak torque, to provide 90% power to detect a difference of at least 30 Nm between groups. Twenty-one TS stems (eight alone, six with calcar wiring, seven with diaphyseal wiring placed 2 cm distal to the lesser trochanter) and seven CB stems were cemented into standard Sawbones. A servo-hydraulic test machine applied a 1000 N load with a 1-degree rotation per second until failure. The peak torque at failure was measured, and the fracture location recorded. Comparisons were performed using two-sample t-tests.CB stems exhibited a significantly higher peak torque at failure (205.3 Nm) than TS stems (159.5 Nm, p=0.020). Calcar-wire-TS (148.2 Nm, p=0.036) and diaphyseal-wire-TS (164.9 Nm, p=0.036) were both weaker than CB stems. Wired-TS stems showed no significant difference from non-wired-TS stems. Additionally, the study could not conclude that calcar wiring is stronger than diaphyseal wiring. All TS fractures occurred at the mid-stem, simulating a B-type fracture, while the addition of the diaphyseal wire shifted the fracture location more distally in four of seven stems (p=0.0699).This biomechanical study supports the clinical evidence that CB stems have stronger resistance to torque than TS stems and may explain lower risk of periprosthetic fracture. The addition of calcar or diaphyseal wires to TS stems resulted in no significant changes in peak torque to fracture. In patients at high risk of periprosthetic fracture, CB cemented stems should be considered.

Background: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a reliable procedure to treat medial compartment knee osteoarthritis (OA). The reported survivorship of UKA has varied in the literature 3–7 . In part, the higher failure rates of UKA seen in registries could be related to the caseload and experience of the reporting surgeon 8 . The introduction of techniques that make procedures more reliable, especially in the hands of inexperienced surgeons, can decrease the rate of failure. With the Oxford UKA implant (Zimmer Biomet), the recommended surgical technique involves cutting the tibia first, followed by the femoral preparation. However, a technique that allows for preparation of the femur first, as well as the use of the femoral component as a reference for the tibial cut, may reduce the common technical errors seen with the procedure. We have utilized the femur-first technique in cases of medial Oxford UKA. Description: The femur-first method outlined in the present article does not require any unique instruments beyond what is supplied by the manufacturer. Before beginning, the femoral positional guide needs to be decoupled from its base. To start, the intramedullary guide is introduced approximately 1 cm anterior and medial to the intercondylar notch. Once the femoral osteophytes are removed, the surgeon identifies the center of the femoral condyle and marks it. The posterior tibial cartilage is then removed with a saw to facilitate the placement of the appropriately sized femoral spherical guide. The size of the femoral component is determined by selecting the implant that aligns best with the width of the femoral condyle. The femoral drill guide is detached from its base because there is not enough space for the base, as the tibia has not yet been resected. The decoupled femoral guide is connected to the intramedullary rod, allowing the precise positioning of the femoral component in approximately 10° of flexion relative to the femoral sagittal plane and drilling of the 2 peg holes. The posterior condylar resection guide is impacted into position, and the osteotomy of the posterior condyle is made. The distal femur is then milled with use of a number-0 spigot, and the femoral component trial is positioned into place. The femoral condyle is “resurfaced” with the femoral component, which restores joint obliquity and the natural height, a critical element of the femur-first technique. Following this, the 1-mm (size-dependent) spherical gauge is placed around the femoral component trial. The tibial guide is secured with the G-clamp and a number-0 resection block, and is pinned into place. We recommend swapping the number-0 cutting guide for a +2 when making the cut in order to avoid over-resection. Recutting is advised if a minimum 3-mm feeler gauge does not adequately occupy the flexion space. The final step is to balance the flexion and extension gaps in the usual fashion. Alternatives: The alternative technique is a traditional tibia-first approach, in which tibial resection is performed prior to femoral resection. As described in the original manufacturer’s manual, the tibial cut is accomplished with use of a number-0 cutting guide, and the tibial rotation is based on the axis formed by the anterior superior iliac spine and knee center, irrespective of the femoral condyle. Rationale: The femur-first technique is advantageous in several ways. When performing the femoral cut first, the surgeon can better align the drill guide at the center of medial femoral condyle. This will result in the femoral component being positioned more in line with the coronal plane of the femoral condyle. Additionally, the tibial resection is made with the femoral trial in place; therefore, the depth of resection can be more accurate, potentially avoiding excessive bone resection. Finally, with the femoral trial in place, the surgeon can judge the rotation and medial-lateral position of the tibial component more precisely, hence lowering the possibility of bearing spin-out, impingement, and dislocation or unexplained pain. Expected Outcomes: The femur-first technique is a bone-preserving procedure that results in thinner bearings when compared with a tibia-first approach 1 . The femur-first approach also improves radiographic outcomes, including femoral coronal, femoral sagittal, and tibial sagittal alignments, while tibial coronal alignment does not differ. There is an early trend toward improved 5-year survivorship with the femur-first (98%) versus tibia-first (94%, p = 0.35) techniques. There has been no significant difference reported in Knee Society Scores between techniques. Important Tips: Perform a preliminary cut of the posterior tibial cartilage in order to allow insertion of the femoral drill guide under the femoral condyle. Make sure the femoral drill guide lies in the center of the marked medial femoral condyle. Align the tibial sagittal cut with the femoral component trial in order to avoid bearing impingement. Be conservative in the tibial cutting by utilizing a +2 cutting guide (since the coupling is performed with the intramedullary guide in place, which drives the tibial guide distally). Acronyms and Abbreviations: UKA = unicompartmental knee arthroplasty FF = femur-first M-L = medial-lateral AP = anteroposterior PA = posteroanterior ASA = acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin) BID = bis in die, twice a day PT = physical therapy TF = tibia-first FCA = femoral coronal angle FSA = femoral sagittal angle TSA = tibial sagittal angle IM = intramedullary OA = osteoarthritis

AbstractIntroductionThe humerus is a common site of metastases and primary tumors. For some patients with a segmental defect and/or diaphyseal cortical destruction a cemented intercalary device may provide a more reliable construct, however data on their use is limited.MethodsWe reviewed 43 (28 male and 15 female) patients treated with an intercalary humeral spacer at a single tertiary referral center between 1989 and 2022. Humeral lesions were most commonly secondary to metastatic disease (n = 29, 68%), with 25 (58%) patients presenting with a pathologic fracture. Mean age and body mass index were 66 years and 27.9 kg/m2. First generation taper joint device were used in 22 patients and second‐generation lap device in 21 patients.ResultsFollowing reconstruction the 2‐year overall survival was 30%. Mechanical complications occurred in 11 patients, most commonly aseptic loosening (n = 6, 14%). With death as a competing risk, the cumulative incidence of mechanical failure was 28% at 2‐years postoperative. Following the procedure, mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores was 70% and mean shoulder elevation was 87°.ConclusionReconstruction of the humeral diaphysis with an intercalary endoprosthesis provides restoration of function of the upper extremity, however, is associated with one in four patients having mechanical failure.

Purpose To analyze the current literature regarding risk factors associated with medial ulnar collateral ligament (MUCL) injury in baseball players and to serve as a robust source for identifying modifiable risk factors that once optimized, have the potential to reduce injury risk. Methods Comprehensive search of the available literature was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated risk factors for MUCL injuries in the elbow of baseball players. Risk of bias assessment was performed via Methodological Index for Non‐randomized Studies (MINORS) scoring system. The Oxford Centre for Evidence‐Based Medicine was used to determine level of evidence. Variables of interest; player age, position, shoulder motion, humeral retrotorsion, joint laxity, strength, balance, geography, velocity, pitch count, pitch types, throwing volumes, and throwing mechanics were recorded. Results Twenty‐one studies were included in this systematic review. MINORS scores ranged from 75 to 87%, and variables demonstrated significant heterogeneity. Performance‐based risk factors for MUCL injury included: increased pitch count (both annual and per game), higher percentage of fastballs thrown, smaller pitch repertoire, and/or a loss of pitching velocity. Biomechanical studies demonstrated the relationship between decreased shoulder range of motion (total ROM, ER, IR, and abduction), increased humeral retrotorsion, increased elbow valgus opening in the throwing arm, lower Y‐Balance score, and increased lateral release position to increased MUCL injury. Conclusions Risk factors for MUCL injury can generally be categorized into 4 primary groups: 1) various player demographics and characteristics, 2) throwing too hard (high velocity), 3) throwing too much (pitch count/volume), and 4) throwing with poor mechanics. In this systematic review, the most significant nonmodifiable risk factors for MUCL injuries included: increased glenohumeral retrotorsion and elbow valgus opening. The most consistent modifiable risk factors included: total shoulder range of motion, pitch count, pitch selection, Y balance score, and lateral release position. Pitch velocity was inconsistent in literature, but most studies found this as a risk for injury. These risk factors may serve as appropriate targets for future evidence‐based injury mitigation strategies. Level of Evidence Level IV, systematic review of Level II‐IV studies.