Barlow, Jonathan D

Introduction: Flipped classroom models, which use active, case-based discussion, have shown promise across graduate medical education. Previous literature demonstrates that transitioning to a flipped classroom model resulted in significant increases in overall Orthopaedic In-Training Examination (OITE) scores. This observational study retrospectively compares foot and ankle OITE scores for orthopaedic surgery residents before and after implementation of a flipped classroom curriculum. Methods: This retrospective study reviewed OITE scores for orthopaedic residents, comparing a lecture-based curriculum (n = 49) to a flipped classroom curriculum (n = 61). Residents who started their second year in July 2020 or later were defined as treated. The curriculum is given to the postgraduate year-2 (PGY2) residents only. Percentage of correct foot and ankle questions (F&A) were analyzed via mixed-effects models using random-subject intercepts. Fixed effects included PGY, overall performance on other sections, and flipped classroom status. All statistical analyses were performed in R version 4.4.1. Results: Residents in the flipped classroom cohort demonstrated a statistically significant increase in F&A questions answered correctly. The average increase was 7% (95% confidence interval: 4%, 10%; p < 0.001). This improvement trend became clearly visible in PGY3 and grew stronger in senior residents. Specifically, PGY3 residents improved their mean percentage correct from 62.26% to 66.07% (p = 0.16). PGY4 residents improved from 69.16% to 74.83% (p = 0.013), and PGY5 residents improved from 69.03% to 75.53% (p = 0.006). Historically, approximately 75% of traditional PGY5 residents scored lower on the F&A section than on the rest of the examination. Conversely, in the flipped classroom group, approximately 75% of PGY4 and PGY5 residents scored higher on the F&A section compared with other sections Discussion: The implementation of a flipped classroom model was associated with a statistically significant improvement in resident performance on the F&A section of the OITE. The educational benefits of this curriculum appear cumulative over the course of residency, with the most substantial performance gains realized by senior residents in their fourth and fifth years of training. Level of Evidence: Level III , Observational Study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Abstract Shoulder arthroscopy is a versatile method for treating a variety of shoulder pathologies in a minimally invasive manner. Typically, it is performed with the patient positioned in a beach‐chair or lateral decubitus position with the latter being conventionally preferred for shoulder instability work given the use of traction and creation of a distracted joint. This allows ideal visualization and accessibility of the anterior, inferior, and posterior aspects of the glenoid, labrum, and axillary pouch. Despite the apparent advantages, the lateral decubitus position comes with its own technical challenges. Many of these may stem from surgeon training, experience, and level of familiarity with the positioning and arthroscopic view. This Technical Note demonstrates a reproducible and teachable method for efficient and effective diagnostic shoulder arthroscopy in the lateral decubitus position, along with presenting its associated advantages and disadvantages. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

» The proximal humerus is a common location for primary bone tumors, and the goal of surgical care is to obtain a negative margin resection and subsequent reconstruction of the proximal humerus to allow for shoulder function. » The current evidence supports the use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty over hemiarthroplasty when reconstructing the proximal humerus after resection of a bone sarcoma if the axillary nerve can be preserved. » There is a lack of high-quality data comparing allograft prosthetic composite (APC) with endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal humerus. » Reverse APC should be performed using an allograft with donor rotator cuff to allow for soft-tissue repair of the donor and host rotator cuff, leading to improvements in shoulder motion compared with an endoprosthesis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare three fluoroscopic methods for determining femoral rotation. METHODS: Native femoral version was measured by computed tomography in 20 intact femurs from 10 cadaveric specimens. Two Steinmann pins were placed into each left femur above and below a planned transverse osteotomy which was completed through the diaphysis. Four surgeons utilized the true lateral (TL), neck-horizontal angle (NH), and lesser trochanter profile (LTP) techniques to correct the injured femur's rotation using the intact right femur as reference, yielding 120 measurements. Accuracy was assessed by comparing the angle subtended by the two Steinmann pins before and after manipulation and comparing against version measurements of the right femur. RESULTS: Absolute mean rotational error in the fractured femur compared to its uninjured state was 6.0° (95% CI, 4.6-7.5), 6.6° (95% CI, 5.0-8.2), and 8.5° (95% CI, 6.5-10.6) for the TL, NH, and LTP techniques, respectively, without significant difference between techniques (p = 0.100). Compared to the right femur, absolute mean rotational error was 6.6° (95% CI, 1.0-12.2), 6.4° (95% CI, 0.1-12.6), and 8.9° (95% CI, 0.8-17.0) for the TL, NH, and LTP techniques, respectively, without significant difference (p = 0.180). Significantly more femurs were malrotated by >15° using the LTP method compared to the TL and NH methods (20.0% vs 2.5% and 5.0%, p = 0.030). Absolute mean error in estimating femoral rotation of the intact femur using the TL and NH methods compared to CT was 6.6° (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.1-8.2) and 4.4° (95% CI, 3.4-5.4), respectively, with significant difference between the two methods (p = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: The true lateral (TL), neck-horizontal angle (NH), and the lesser trochanter profile (LTP) techniques performed similarly in correcting rotation of the fractured femur, but significantly more femurs were malrotated by >15° using the LTP technique. This supports preferential use of the TL or NH methods for determining femoral version intraoperatively.

Case: This report describes the case of an athletic 12-year-old boy who presented with a 64° left proximal humeral varus angulation deformity and physeal bar secondary to multiple operations for a proximal humeral metaphyseal cystic lesion and pathologic fracture. Using a combined lateral closing and medial opening-wedge osteotomy, a 68° valgus correction was achieved with excellent clinical and functional outcomes at 16-month follow-up. Forward flexion increased from 120 to 170° preoperatively to postoperatively while abduction improved from 110° preoperatively to 170° postoperatively. Conclusion: A combined lateral closing and medial opening-wedge osteotomy of the proximal humerus can successfully treat cases of extreme proximal humerus varus in the growing shoulder where unilateral or dome osteotomies are not suitable.

Purpose To evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) and arthroscopy‐assisted lower trapezius tendon transfer (LTT) for posterosuperior irreparable rotator cuff tears (IRCTs). Methods Over an almost 6‐year period (October 2015 to March 2021), all patients who underwent IRCT surgery with a minimum 12‐month follow‐up period were identified. For patients with a substantial active external rotation (ER) deficit or lag sign, LTT was preferentially selected. Patient‐reported outcome scores included the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, strength score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score. Results We included 32 SCR patients and 72 LTT patients. Preoperatively, LTT patients had more advanced teres minor fatty infiltration (0.3 vs 1.1, P = .009), a higher global fatty infiltration index (1.5 vs 1.9, P = .035), and a higher presence of the ER lag sign (15.6% vs 48.6%, P < .001). At a mean follow‐up of 2.9 ± 1.3 years (range, 1.0‐6.3 years), no differences in patient‐reported outcome scores were observed. Postoperatively, SCR patients had a lower VAS score (0.3 vs 1.1, P = .017), higher forward elevation (FE) (156° vs 143°, P = .004), and higher FE strength (4.8 vs 4.5, P = .005) and showed greater improvements in the VAS score (6.8 vs 5.1, P = .009), FE (56° vs 31°, P = .004), and FE strength (1.0 vs 0.4, P < .001). LTT patients showed greater improvement in ER (17° vs 29°, P = .026). There was no statistically significant between‐cohort difference in complication rate (9.4% vs 12.5%, P = .645) or reoperation rate (3.1% vs 10%, P = .231). Conclusions With adequate selection criteria, both SCR and LTT provided improved clinical outcomes for posterosuperior IRCTs. Additionally, SCR led to better pain relief and restoration of FE whereas LTT provided more reliable improvement in ER. Level of Evidence Level III, treatment study with retrospective cohort comparison.

Purpose To evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of 3 isolated meniscal repair (IMR) treatment strategies: platelet‐rich plasma (PRP)–augmented IMR, IMR with a marrow venting procedure (MVP), and IMR without biological augmentation. Methods A Markov model was developed to evaluate the baseline case: a young adult patient meeting the indications for IMR. Health utility values, failure rates, and transition probabilities were derived from the published literature. Costs were determined based on the typical patient undergoing IMR at an outpatient surgery center. Outcome measures included costs, quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs), and the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results Total costs of IMR with an MVP were $8,250; PRP‐augmented IMR, $12,031; and IMR without PRP or an MVP, $13,326. PRP‐augmented IMR resulted in an additional 2.16 QALYs, whereas IMR with an MVP produced slightly fewer QALYs, at 2.13. Non‐augmented repair produced a modeled gain of 2.02 QALYs. The ICER comparing PRP‐augmented IMR versus MVP‐augmented IMR was $161,742/QALY, which fell well above the $50,000 willingness‐to‐pay threshold. Conclusions IMR with biological augmentation (MVP or PRP) resulted in a higher number of QALYs and lower costs than non‐augmented IMR, suggesting that biological augmentation is cost‐effective. Total costs of IMR with an MVP were significantly lower than those of PRP‐augmented IMR, whereas the number of additional QALYs produced by PRP‐augmented IMR was only slightly higher than that produced by IMR with an MVP. As a result, neither treatment dominated over the other. However, because the ICER of PRP‐augmented IMR fell well above the $50,000 willingness‐to‐pay threshold, IMR with an MVP was determined to be the overall cost‐effective treatment strategy in the setting of young adult patients with isolated meniscal tears. Level of Evidence Level III, economic and decision analysis.

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.