Iturregui, Jose

Purpose To determine whether long‐term preoperative nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drug (NSAID) use affected the revision rates after primary tendon repair for the following common sports medicine surgical procedures: rotator cuff repair (RCR), Achilles tendon repair (ATR), distal biceps repair (DBR), or quadriceps tendon repair (QTR). Methods A retrospective comparative study using a national insurance database was performed. Patients who underwent major tendon repair, including RCR, ATR, DBR, or QTR, with at least 2‐year follow‐up were identified. Those who had a diagnosis of long‐term NSAID use prior to the index operation were identified and matched 1:4 to controls without NSAID use based on age, sex, specific tendon repaired, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. The revision repair rates of the 2 groups were compared. Results A total of 36,068 patients underwent major tendon repair. Of these, 7,246 (20%) met the long‐term NSAID use criteria prior to tendon repair (NSAID users). After RCR, 3.2% of NSAID users (n = 190) and 2.6% of controls (n = 617) underwent revision surgery within 2 years (odds ratio [OR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97‐1.36; P = .10). After ATR, NSAID users had a revision rate of 3.9% (n = 24) versus 2.5% (n = 62) in the control cohort (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.89‐2.38; P = .12). After DBR, both NSAID users and controls had fewer than 11 revision cases (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.49‐4.16; P = .42). After QTR, the revision rate was 5.9% (n = 30) for NSAID users compared with 4.8% (n = 95) for the control group (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.77‐1.86; P = .38). None of the observed differences in revision rates between NSAID users and controls were significant. Conclusions Patients with a diagnosis of and coding for long‐term preoperative NSAID use do not have greater revision rates within 2 years of primary tendon repair than patients without this diagnosis. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective case‐control study.

Purpose To evaluate how arthroscopic meniscectomy utilization, reimbursement, physician billing practices, and patient populations have changed within the Medicare population from 2013 to 2021 at a national level and regional level. Methods The Medicare Physician & Other Practitioners database was queried for all episodes of 2‐compartment and single‐compartment arthroscopic meniscectomy between 2013 and 2021. Utilization per 10,000 beneficiaries and average inflation‐adjusted reimbursement were assessed. Physician practice styles, measured through changes in the services billed, and Medicare beneficiary demographic characteristics were extracted each year. The Kruskal‐Wallis test was performed to compare regions. Results Between 2013 and 2021, two‐compartment meniscectomy utilization per 10,000 Medicare beneficiaries declined by 54.9% and single‐compartment meniscectomy utilization declined by 54.2%. Average reimbursement declined by 9.3% and 12.5% for 2‐compartment meniscectomy and single‐compartment meniscectomy, respectively. In 2021, the South had the highest utilization of both 2‐compartment (3.8/10,000) and single‐compartment (4.7/10,000) meniscectomies while having the lowest average reimbursement for 2‐compartment meniscectomy ($383.02, P < .001). Nationally, the average number of beneficiaries per surgeon performing single‐compartment meniscectomy declined by 3.8% whereas the average number of billable services performed per beneficiary increased by 46.6%. The comorbidity risk score of these patients decreased by 8.7%, with the West having the healthiest patients in 2021. Conclusions Meniscectomy utilization and reimbursement have been declining nationally within the Medicare population. Surgeons in the South performed the most meniscectomies while having among the lowest reimbursement. The practice patterns of surgeons performing meniscectomies have been changing, with surgeons performing nearly 50% more total billable services per beneficiary while performing fewer unique billable services. Additionally, the patient population of surgeons who perform meniscectomy was healthier in 2021 than in 2013. Clinical Relevance This study highlights changes in meniscectomy utilization and reimbursement over time in the face of changing evidence of meniscectomy use in elderly patients and new Medicare legislature regarding reimbursement.

Objectives: To describe outcomes of posterior capsular release to treat knee extension deficits after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in athletes. Methods: A retrospective review was performed between January 2014 and December 2019 for patients undergoing arthroscopic posterior capsular release for knee extension loss following ACL reconstruction. Patients were indicated for the procedure if they had greater than 10° of extension loss at least three months after ACL reconstruction that was refractory to physical therapy. Patients were included in the study if they were involved in either high school or college athletics, had complete outcomes of interest, and had at least two years of follow up. Collected outcomes included preoperative and postoperative measurement of knee extension, international knee documentation committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, return to sport data, and complications. Results: Over the study period a total of 38 arthroscopic posterior capsular releases were performed. Of these, 20 were high school or college athletes. Two of these patients did not have 2-year follow up, leaving a total of 18 patients included in the analysis. Patients underwent surgery at an average of 16 weeks after ACL reconstruction. Knee extension improved an average of 13.8° at 2-years follow up (pre- release extension deficit 15.1°, post-release extension deficit 1.3°, p < 0.005). Improvements in the IKDC score averaged 21.7 at 6 months and 35.0 at 24 months, both of which were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Similarly, differences in Lysholm included a significant improvement of 23.0 and 34.2 at 6 months and 2 years, respectively (p < 0.001). In total, 77.8% returned to sport at an average of 9.8 months from their primary surgery and 6.5 months following posterior capsular release surgery. Complications included one patient that required revision capsular release for persistent extension loss, one ACL tear of the ipsilateral knee, and two ACL tears of the contralateral knee. No infections or neurovascular injuries occurred. Conclusions: Knee extension loss after ligamentous repair surgery can have significant consequences including diminished patient satisfaction, reduced return to sport, and an increased risk of osteoarthritis development. Although arthroscopic posterior capsular release is a recognized treatment for knee extension loss, outcomes have not been reported in athletes. In our series, arthroscopic posterior capsular release resulted in significant improvement of knee extension and patient reported outcome scores at 6 month and 2 years postoperatively. Additionally, the procedure appears to be safe with few complications and only 5.6% of patients requiring repeat arthroscopy for knee extension loss. Posterior capsular release appears to be a reliable and safe treatment for athletes with persistent knee extension loss after ACL reconstruction.