Provencher, Matthew T.

AbstractPurposeAnterior cruciate ligament tears and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are common in young athletes. The modifiable and non‐modifiable factors contributing to ACLR failure and reoperation are incompletely understood. The purpose of this study was to determine ACLR failure rates in a physically high‐demand population and identify the patient‐specific risk factors, including prolonged time between diagnosis and surgical correction, that portend failure.MethodsA consecutive series of military service members with ACLR with and without concomitant procedures (meniscus [M] and/or cartilage [C]) done at military facilities between 2008 and 2011 was completed via the Military Health System Data Repository. This was a consecutive series of patients without a history of knee surgery for two years prior to the primary ACLR. Kaplan–Meier survival curves were estimated and evaluated with Wilcoxon test. Cox proportional hazard models calculated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to identify demographic and surgical factors that influenced ACLR failure.ResultsOf the 2735 primary ACLRs included in the study, 484/2,735 (18%) experienced ACLR failure within four years, including (261/2,735) (10%) undergoing revision ACLR and (224/2,735) (8%) due to medical separation. The factors that increased failure include Army Service (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.67, 2.87), > 180 days from injury to ACLR (HR 1.550, 95% CI 1.157, 2.076), tobacco use (HR 1.429 95% CI 1.174, 1.738), and younger patient age (HR 1.024, 95% CI 1.004, 1.044).ConclusionThe overall clinical failure rate of service members with ACLR is 17.7% with minimum four‐year follow‐up, where more patients are likely to fail due to revision surgery than medical separation. The cumulative probability of survival at 4 years was 78.5%. Smoking cessation and treating ACLR patients promptly are modifiable risk factors impacting either graft failure or medical separation.Level of evidenceLevel III.

Abstract Introduction Musculoskeletal injuries are an endemic amongst U.S. Military Service Members and significantly strain the Department of Defense’s Military Health System. The Military Health System aims to provide Service Members, military retirees, and their families the right care at the right time. The Military Orthopedics Tracking Injuries and Outcomes Network (MOTION) captures the data that can optimize musculoskeletal care within the Military Health System. This report provides MOTION structural framework and highlights how it can be used to optimize musculoskeletal care. Materials and Methods MOTION established an internet-based data capture system, the MOTION Musculoskeletal Data Portal. All adult Military Health System patients who undergo orthopedic surgery are eligible for entry into the database. All data are collected as routine standard of care, with patients and orthopedic surgeons inputting validated global and condition-specific patient reported outcomes and operative case data, respectively. Patients have the option to consent to allow their standard of care data to be utilized within an institutional review board approved observational research study. MOTION data can be merged with other existing data systems (e.g., electronic medical record) to develop a comprehensive dataset of relevant information. In pursuit of enhancing musculoskeletal injury patient outcomes MOTION aims to: (1) identify factors which predict favorable outcomes; (2) develop models which inform the surgeon and military commanders if patients are behind, on, or ahead of schedule for their targeted return-to-duty/activity; and (3) develop predictive models to better inform patients and surgeons of the likelihood of a positive outcome for various treatment options to enhance patient counseling and expectation management. Results This is a protocol article describing the intent and methodology for MOTION; thus, to date, there are no results to report. Conclusions MOTION was established to capture the data that are necessary to improve military medical readiness and optimize medical resource utilization through the systematic evaluation of short- and long-term musculoskeletal injury patient outcomes. The systematic enhancement of musculoskeletal injury care through data analyses aligns with the National Defense Authorization Act (2017) and Defense Health Agency’s Quadruple Aim, which emphasizes optimizing healthcare delivery and Service Member medical readiness. This transformative approach to musculoskeletal care can be applied across disciplines within the Military Health System.

Objectives: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains one of the most readiness-impairing surgical conditions treated in the US Military. Greater time from the index injury to surgical management (ACLR) unnecessarily prolongs the total time of limited duty. Additionally, prolonged wait times from the index injury to ACLR may increase the patient’s likelihood of sustaining concomitant or secondary intraarticular pathologies (e.g., cartilage and meniscus damage). The optimal timing for surgical reconstruction following ACL injury is debated. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of prolonged time from injury to surgery on medical separation within five years of primary ACLR. We hypothesized that longer durations from injury to primary ACLR would be associated with greater medical separation risk within five years following surgery. Methods: We conducted a retrospective database review using data from the Military Health System Data Repository (MDR) of primary ACLR without and with concomitant procedures (meniscus [M] and/or cartilage [C]) performed within Military Treatment Facilities (MTF) from fiscal year 2009 to and/or cartilage [C]) performed within Military Treatment Facilities (MTF) from fiscal year 2009 to 2011. At the time of the ACLR, ADSMs had to be continuously enrolled for two years prior to the surgery with no history of knee surgeries in direct care (i.e., MTFs) or purchased care to ensure a higher likelihood of the index event being a primary ACLR and not an ACLR revision. A total 2,809 active duty service members were included with primary ACLR. The MDR was queried for baseline demographic, military service, and surgical information at the time of ACLR. Duty status at the time of the ACLR and cause of separation up to five years after primary ACLR were abstracted. The time from the index injury diagnosis to the primary ACLR was calculated and grouped as follows: Acute = 0-42 days, Subacute = 43-91 days, Delayed = 92-179 days, Chronic ≥ 180 days. Kaplan-Meier survivability curves were estimated and evaluated with Log-rank. Cox Proportional Hazard Models calculated Hazard Ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to identify time from injury to surgery, demographic, and military status factors that influenced medical separation risk for patients with primary ACLR (ACLR, ACLR+M, ACLR+C, ACLR+M+C). Results: The index surgical events were categorized by isolated ACLR (48%), ACLR+M (42%), ACLR+C (5%), and ACLR+M+C (4%). Overall, the time from diagnosis to ACLR was approximately equivalent across all time categories: Acute (19%), Subacute (31%), Delayed (23%), and Chronic (25%). The probability of medical separation 5 years following primary ACLR (ACLR, ACLR+M, ACLR+C, ACLR+M+C) was highest for the delayed [92-179 days] group (17%) and lowest for the acute [0-42 days] group (12%). Patients in the delayed group were over 51% more likely to medically separate in the 5 years following the primary ACLR than those who were treated within 42 days from injury (acute group). The difference between the acute group and subacute or chronic was not statistically significant. Those in infantry and combat support related military occupation classifications were 27% more likely to medically separate. Service members in the Army were more than 4.5 times more likely to medically separate compared to those in the Air Force. Smoking and BMI over 29 also increased the risk of medical separation within 5 years by 42% and 91%, respectively. The type of injury at the index event (ACLR, ACLR+M, ACLR+C, ACLR+M+C) did not significantly influence the likelihood of medical separation risk. Conclusion: Delay in treatment from injury to primary ACLR increases the number of limited duty days, effects medical readiness of ADSM, and military retention rates post ACLR. Specifically, when primary ACLR is delayed 3 to 6 months from injury, ADSM have a 51% increased likelihood of military medical separation risk in the 5 years following the ACLR than if they would have been treated within 41 days of injury. Early recognition of ACL tears as well as availability of surgeons and Operative Rooms (ORs) should be evaluated to determine their contribution to the delay in ACLR in the MHS.

Background Although the use of rotator interval closure is frequently advocated as a useful supplement to shoulder instability repairs, the addition of a rotator interval closure after arthroscopic instability repair has not been fully investigated. Purpose The objective of this study was to investigate whether a rotator interval closure improves glenohumeral stability in an anterior and posterior instability shoulder model. Study Design Controlled laboratory study. Methods Fourteen fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulder specimens were dissected free of soft tissues, leaving the rotator cuff intact with simulated cuff loading. All specimens were mounted in a custom testing apparatus using infrared sensors to document glenohumeral translation and rotation. The specimens were then tested for stability in the following order: vented/subluxated state, after arthroscopic anterior (Group 1; 7 specimens) or posterior (Group 2; 7 specimens) instability repair with suture anchors, and then after rotator interval closure. For each of the 3 testing conditions, the following were measured: (1) external and internal rotation at neutral, (2) external and internal rotation at 90° of abduction, (3) posterior and anterior translation at neutral rotation (15 N and 25 N), (4) anterior translation at 90° of abduction and external rotation (Group 1; 15 N and 25 N), (5) posterior translation at 90° of flexion and internal rotation (Group 2; 15 N and 25 N), and (6) sulcus testing in neutral (7.5 N). Results Posterior stability was only improved after anchor capsulolabral repair (8.0 to 5.0 mm; P = .017, 25 N), but there was no improvement after rotator interval closure (5.0 to 4.6 mm; P = .453). However, anterior stability was improved after capsulolabral repair (8.6 to 4.0 mm; P = .016, 25 N) and also improved further by rotator interval closure (4.0 to 2.4 mm; P = .007). The mean loss of external rotation was significantly increased by the addition of the rotator interval closure in both neutral and abducted glenohumeral positions, with a mean external rotation loss of 28° in neutral ( P = .013). The addition of a rotator interval closure did not improve sulcus stability ( P = .4). Conclusion The addition of an arthroscopic rotator interval closure after posterior capsulolabral repair did not improve posterior stability; however, anterior stability was improved further after a rotator interval closure. Inferior stability was not improved. Arthroscopic rotator interval closure significantly decreased external rotation at both neutral and abducted arm positions. Clinical Relevance Arthroscopic closure may be beneficial in certain cases of anterior shoulder instability; however, posterior instability was not improved. Predictable losses of external rotation after rotator interval closure are of concern.