Sanchez-Sotelo, J.

Purpose To (1) report the long‐term outcomes associated with both operative and nonoperative management of capitellar osteochondritis dissecans (OCD), (2) identify factors associated with failure of nonoperative management, and (3) determine whether delay in surgery affects final outcomes. Methods All patients who received a diagnosis of capitellar OCD from 1995‐2020 within a geographic cohort were included. Medical records, imaging studies, and operative reports were manually reviewed to record demographic data, treatment strategies, and outcomes. The cohort was divided into 3 groups: (1) nonoperative management, (2) early surgery, and (3) delayed surgery. Delayed surgery (surgery ≥6 months after symptom onset) was considered failure of nonoperative management. Results Fifty elbows with a mean follow‐up period of 10.5 years (median, 10.3 years; range, 1‐25 years) were studied. Of these, 7 (14%) were definitively treated nonoperatively, 16 (32%) underwent delayed surgery after at least 6 months of failed nonoperative treatment, and 27 (54%) underwent early surgical intervention. When compared with nonoperative management, surgical management resulted in superior Mayo Elbow Performance Index pain scores (40.1 vs 33, P = .04), fewer mechanical symptoms (9% vs 50%, P < .01), and better elbow flexion (141° vs 131°, P = .01) at long‐term follow‐up. Older patients trended toward increased failure of nonoperative management ( P = .06). The presence of an intra‐articular loose body predicted failure of nonoperative management ( P = .01; odds ratio, 13). Plain radiography and magnetic resonance imaging had poor sensitivities for identifying loose bodies (27% and 40%, respectively). Differences in outcomes after early versus delayed surgical management were not observed. Conclusions Nonoperative management of capitellar OCD failed 70% of the time. Elbows that did not undergo surgery had slightly more symptoms and decreased functional outcomes compared with those treated surgically. The greatest predictors of failure of nonoperative treatment were older age and presence of a loose body; however, an initial trial of nonoperative treatment did not adversely impact the success of future surgery. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective cohort study.

AbstractPurposeThe term “pectoralis minor syndrome” refers to this constellation of symptoms that can occur when the pectoralis minor (Pm) is shortened and contracted. Release of the tendon of the Pm from the coracoid has been reported to provide substantial clinical improvement to patients presenting with pectoralis minor syndrome. The purpose of this study was (1) to describe the technique for endoscopic release of pectoralis minor tendon at the subdeltoid space, (2) to classify the pectoralis minor syndrome according to its severity and (3) and to report the short‐term outcomes of this procedure in a consecutive series of patients diagnosed with pectoralis minor syndrome.MethodsEndoscopic release of the pectoralis minor tendon was performed in a series of 10 patients presenting with pectoralis minor syndrome. There were six females and four males with a median age at the time of surgery of 42 (range from 20 to 58) years. Four shoulders were categorized as grade I (scapular dyskinesis), and six as grade II (intermittent brachial plexopathy). Shoulders were evaluated for pain, motion, satisfaction, subjective shoulder value (SSV), quick‐DASH, ASES score, and complications. The mean follow‐up time was 19 (range, 6 to 49) months.ResultsArthroscopic release of the tendon of the Pm led to substantial resolution of pectoralis minor syndrome symptoms in all but one shoulder, which was considered a failure. Preoperatively, the median VAS for pain was 8.5 (range, 7–10) and the mean SSV was 20% (range, 10% ‐ 50%). At most recent follow‐up the mean VAS for pain was 1 (range, 0–6) and the mean SSV 80% (range, 50% ‐ 90%). Before surgery, mean ASES and quick‐DASH scores were 19.1 (range, 10–41.6) and 83.1 (range, 71 and 95.5) points respectively. At most recent follow‐up, mean ASES and quick‐DASH scores were 80.1 (range, 40–100) and 19.3 (range, 2.3–68) points respectively. No surgical complications occurred in any of the shoulder included in this study.ConclusionsEndoscopic release of the tendon of the pectoralis minor from the coracoid improves pain, function and patient reported outcomes in the majority of patients presenting with the diagnosis of isolated pectoralis minor syndrome.

Background: Continuous passive motion (CPM) has been used for decades, but we are not aware of any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which CPM has been compared with physical therapy (PT) for rehabilitation following release of elbow contracture. Methods: In this single-blinded, single-center RCT, we randomly assigned patients undergoing arthroscopic release of elbow contracture to a rehabilitation protocol involving either CPM or PT. The primary outcomes were the rate of recovery and the arc of elbow motion (range of motion) at 1 year. The rate of recovery was evaluated by measuring range of motion at 6 weeks and 3 months. The secondary outcomes included other range-of-motion-related outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), flexion strength and endurance, grip strength, and forearm circumference at multiple time points. Results: A total of 24 patients were assigned to receive CPM, and 27 were assigned to receive PT. At 1 year, CPM was superior to PT with regard to the range of motion, with an estimated treatment difference of 9° (95% confidence interval [CI], 3° to 16°; p = 0.007). Similarly, the use of CPM led to a greater range of motion at 6 weeks and 3 months than PT. The percentage of lost motion recovered at 1 year was higher in the CPM group (51%) than in the PT group (36%) (p = 0.01). The probability of restoring a functional range of motion at 1 year was 62% higher in the CPM group than in the PT group (risk ratio for functional range of motion, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.01 to 2.61; p = 0.04). PROM scores were similar in the 2 groups at all time points, except for a difference in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) elbow function subscale, in favor of CPM, at 6 weeks. The use of CPM decreased swelling and reduced the loss of flexion strength, flexion endurance, and grip strength on day 3, with no between-group differences thereafter. Conclusions: Among patients undergoing arthroscopic release of elbow contracture, those who received CPM obtained a faster recovery and a greater range of motion at 1 year, with a higher chance of restoration of functional elbow motion than those who underwent routine PT. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be a devastating complication following shoulder arthroplasty. PJI following hip and knee arthroplasties has been found to increase mortality. However, anatomical and bacteriologic differences could potentially result in a different trend after shoulder arthroplasties. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to determine whether there is an association between shoulder PJI and all-cause mortality. Methods: Our institutional Total Joint Registry Database was queried to identify patients who underwent revision shoulder arthroplasty procedures between 2000 and 2018. A total of 1,160 procedures were then classified as either septic (21.8%) or aseptic (78.2%). Septic revisions were further subdivided into (1) debridement, antibiotics, irrigation, and implant retention (9.1%); (2) 2-stage reimplantation for deep infection (61.3%); (3) implant resection without reimplantation (3.6%); and (4) unexpected positive cultures at revision surgery (26.1%). The most common bacterium isolated was Cutibacterium acnes (64.4%). All-cause patient mortality was determined with use of our registry and confirmed with use of a nationwide mortality database. All-cause crude and adjusted mortality rates were then compared between groups. Results: The 1-year crude mortality rate was 1.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9% to 2.6%) for the aseptic group and 2.8% (95% CI, 0.7% to 4.8%) for the septic group (p = 0.31). Multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated an elevated but statistically similar adjusted hazard ratio for 1-year all-cause mortality of 1.9 (95% CI, 0.8 to 4.6) when comparing the septic to the aseptic group (p = 0.17). The risk of 2-year all-cause mortality was significantly higher in the septic group, with a hazard ratio of 2.2 (95% CI, 1.1 to 4.5; p = 0.029). In univariate analyses, increased 5-year mortality in the septic revision group was associated with age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection, whereas C. acnes infection was associated with lower mortality. Conclusions: Shoulder PJI is associated with an adjusted 2-year all-cause mortality rate that is double that of aseptic patients. The results of the present study should be utilized to appropriately counsel patients who are considered to be at risk for infection following shoulder arthroplasty. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Although prophylactic antibiotics are considered the standard of care, data with regard to the comparative efficacy of specific antibiotics in the prevention of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) have remained limited. This study evaluated whether perioperative antibiotic choice affects rates of PJI development in shoulder arthroplasty. Methods: From 2000 to 2019, all primary shoulder arthroplasty types (hemiarthroplasty, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, reverse shoulder arthroplasty) performed for elective and trauma indications with perioperative antibiotic data and a minimum follow-up of 2 years were identified from a single institution. Demographic characteristics, PJI risk factors, and PJI-free survivorship data were retrieved. Multivariable analyses were conducted to determine the association between the antibiotic administered and the development of PJI. Results: Of 7,713 shoulder arthroplasties, cefazolin was administered in 6,879 procedures (89.2%) and non-cefazolin antibiotics consisting of vancomycin (465 procedures [6.0%]), clindamycin (345 procedures [4.5%]), and alternative regimens (24 procedures [0.31%]) were administered in 834 procedures (10.8%). PJIs occurred in 101 shoulder arthroplasties (1.3%), with Cutibacterium acnes as the most common pathogen (44 procedures [43.6%]). PJI-free survivorship was greater in shoulder arthroplasties in which cefazolin was administered compared with those in which non-cefazolin antibiotics were administered, with 0.91% greater survival free of PJI at 1 month, 1.4% at 1 year, and 2.7% at 15 years (p < 0.001). Cefazolin administration, compared with non-cefazolin administration, was associated with a 69% reduction in all-cause PJI risk and a 78% reduction in C. acnes PJI risk (p < 0.001). A higher risk of PJI for both groups was observed with vancomycin; the hazard ratio [HR] was 2.32 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22 to 4.40; p = 0.010) for all-cause PJI and 2.94 (95% CI, 1.12 to 7.49; p = 0.028) for C. acnes PJI. A higher risk of PJI was also observed for both groups for clindamycin; the HR was 5.07 (95% CI, 2.83 to 9.05; p < 0.001) for all-cause PJI and 8.01 (95% CI, 3.63 to 17.42; p < 0.001) for C. acnes PJI. Conclusions: In primary shoulder arthroplasty, cefazolin administration was associated with a significantly lower rate of PJI compared with non-cefazolin alternatives, including both vancomycin and clindamycin. These risk discrepancies were observed across all infectious pathogens and may be considered even greater when C. acnes was the infecting bacterium. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Purpose To generate an evidence‐based opioid‐prescribing guideline by assessing the pattern of total opioid consumption and the factors that may predict opioid consumption following arthroscopic release of elbow contracture and to investigate whether the use of continuous passive motion (CPM), as compared to physical therapy (PT), was associated with a decrease in pain and opioid consumption after arthroscopic release of elbow contracture. Methods Data collected from a randomized controlled trial that compared continuous passive motion (CPM) ( n = 24) to physical therapy (PT) ( n = 27) following arthroscopic release of elbow contracture was analyzed for opioid use. Fifty‐one participants recorded their daily opioid consumption in a postoperative diary for 90 days. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with opioid use. Recommended quantities for postoperative prescription were generated using the 50th percentile for patients without and the 75th percentile for patients with factors associated with higher opioid use. Results The median total opioid prescription was 437.5‐mg morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) (58 pills of 5 mg oxycodone) and the median total opioid consumption was 75 MMEs (10 pills of 5‐mg oxycodone). Twenty‐two percent of patients took no opioid medication, 53% took ≤10 pills, 69% took ≤20 pills and 75% took ≤30 pills. Predictors of higher opioid use were preoperative opioid use, age <60 years and inflammatory arthritis. The total opioid consumption appeared similar between the CPM and the PT group. Seventy‐five percent of patient’s home opioid requirements would be satisfied using the following guideline: Patients undergoing contracture release for osteoarthritis or post‐traumatic contracture should be given a prescription for 10 pills of 5 mg oxycodone or its equivalent at discharge. Patients with inflammatory conditions or those taking preoperative opioids should be prescribed 30 pills of 5 mg oxycodone or its equivalent. Conclusion This study suggests that most patients undergoing arthroscopic release of elbow contracture use relatively few opioid pills after surgery. Use of an evidence‐based guideline could decrease opioid prescriptions substantially, while still effectively treating patients’ pain.

AbstractThe elbow is particularly prone to stiffness. Loss of elbow motion is very limiting, and can be the result of trauma, primary osteoarthritis, heterotopic ossification and other conditions. Several exposures have been described for open elbow contracture release. Although a few decades ago elbow arthroscopy was considered only for diagnosis and removal of loose bodies, contemporary arthroscopic techniques allow successful management of the majority of conditions leading to elbow stiffness. Careful patient evaluation, use of advanced imaging studies, and acquisition of appropriate surgical skills are essential for the successful arthroscopic management of the stiff elbow. This expert opinion reviews some fundamentals of elbow stiffness as well as principles for the evaluation and arthroscopic management of the stiff elbow.

Background Persistent infection rate after 2-stage reimplantation complicating elbow arthroplasty has been reported to be as high as 25%. The purposes of this retrospective study were to determine the infection eradication rates, complications and outcomes in a cohort of patients treated with two-stage reimplantation for deep periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) and to determine possible associated risk factors for treatment failure. Methods Between 2000 and 2017, 52 elbows underwent a two-stage reimplantation for PJI after TEA. There were 22 males and 30 females with a mean age of 61 (range, 25–82) years. The most common bacterium was Staphylococcus epidermidis (28 elbows). Mayo Elbow Performance Scores were calculated at the latest follow-up. Mean follow-up time was 6 years (range, 2–14 years). Results PJI was eradicated in 36 elbows (69%). The remaining 16 elbows were considered treatment failures secondary to recurrent infection. The risk of persistent infection was 3.3 times higher in elbows with retained cement (p 0.04), and 3.5 times higher when the infecting organism was Staphylococcus epidermidis (p 0.06). Conclusion Two-stage reimplantation for PJI after TEA was successful in eradicating deep infection in 69% of cases. The eradication of PJI after TEA still needs to be improved substantially.

Background: Existing data on the epidemiology of shoulder arthroplasty are limited to future projections of incidence. However, the prevalence of shoulder arthroplasty (the number of individuals with a shoulder arthroplasty alive at a certain time and its implications for the burden of revision procedures) remains undetermined for the United States. Hence, the purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was queried to count all patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), including both anatomic and reverse TSA, and hemiarthroplasty between 1988 and 2017. The counting method was used to calculate the current prevalence of TSA and hemiarthroplasty using age and sex-specific population and mortality data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Results: In 2017, an estimated 823,361 patients (95% confidence interval [CI], 809,267 to 837,129 patients) were living in the United States with a shoulder replacement. This represents a prevalence of 0.258%, increasing markedly from 1995 (0.031%) and 2005 (0.083%). Female patients had a higher prevalence at 0.294% than male patients at 0.221%. Over 2% of people who were ≥80 years of age in the United States were living with a shoulder replacement. Furthermore, approximately 60% of patients living with a shoulder replacement had undergone the operation between 2013 and 2017. The incidence of revision shoulder arthroplasty is increasing on an annual basis, with 10,290 revision procedures performed in 2017, costing the U.S. health-care system $205 million. Conclusions: The prevalence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States has markedly increased over time. This trend will likely continue given increasing life expectancies and exponentially increasing shoulder arthroplasty incidence rates. Most patients do not have long-term follow-up, and revision shoulder arthroplasty rates are increasing, a trend that is projected to continue. The data from our study highlight the enormous public health impact of shoulder replacement and shed light on a potentially increasing revision burden.