Hall, Mederic M.

Purpose To establish consensus statements on platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) for the treatment of musculoskeletal pathologies. Methods A consensus process on the treatment of PRP using a modified Delphi technique was conducted. Thirty‐five orthopaedic surgeons and sports medicine physicians participated in these consensus statements on PRP. The participants were composed of representatives of the Biologic Association, representing 9 international orthopaedic and musculoskeletal professional societies invited due to their active interest in the study of orthobiologics. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was indicated by 100% agreement with a proposed statement. Results There was consensus on 62% of statements about PRP. Conclusions (1) PRP should be classified based on platelet count, leukocyte count, red blood count, activation method, and pure‐plasma versus fibrin matrix; (2) PRP characteristics for reporting in research studies are platelet count, leukocyte count, neutrophil count, red blood cell count, total volume, the volume of injection, delivery method, and the number of injections; (3) the prognostic factors for those undergoing PRP injections are age, body mass index, severity/grade of pathology, chronicity of pathology, prior injections and response, primary diagnosis (primary vs postsurgery vs post‐trauma vs psoriatic), comorbidities, and smoking; (4) regarding age and body mass index, there is no minimum or maximum, but clinical judgment should be used at extremes of either; (5) the ideal dose of PRP is undetermined; and (6) the minimal volume required is unclear and may depend on the pathology. Level of Evidence Level V, expert opinion.

ObjectivesTo 1) determine the types and frequency of complications within 3 months following ultrasound‐guided surgical procedures, and 2) identify any patient demographics, co‐morbidities, or procedural characteristics that were associated with an increased risk of complications.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed at six Sports Medicine clinics across the United States. The Clavien‐Dindo classification was used to categorize procedural complications on a 5‐point scale from 1, representing any deviation in post‐procedure care without requiring pharmacological or invasive treatment to 5, representing death. Generalized Estimating Equations for binomial outcomes with a logit link were used to estimate the overall and procedure‐specific 3‐month complication rates.ResultsAmong 1902 patients, 8.1% (n = 154) had diabetes and 6.3% (n = 119) were current smokers. The analysis included 2,369 procedures, which were performed in either the upper extremity (44.1%, n = 1045) or lower extremity (55.2%, n = 1308) regions. The most common procedure was ultrasound‐guided tenotomy (69.9%, n = 1655). Additional procedures included, trigger finger release (13.1%, n = 310), tendon scraping (8.0%, n = 189), carpal tunnel release (5.4%, n = 128), soft tissue release (2.1%, n = 50), and compartment fasciotomy (1.6%, n = 37). Overall, there was a complication rate of 1.2% (n = 29 complications; 95% CI: 0.8–1.7%). Individual procedures had complication rates that ranged from 0 to 2.7%. There were 13 Grade I complications in 13 patients, 12 Grade II complications in 10 patients, 4 Grade III complications in 4 patients, and 0 Grade IV or V complications. No associations between complication risk and any patient demographics (age, sex, BMI), co‐morbidities (diabetes, smoker), or procedure characteristics (type, region) were identified.ConclusionThis retrospective review provides an evidence‐based estimate supporting the low level of risk associated with ultrasound‐guided surgical procedures for patients from a variety of geographical settings who are seeking care at private and academic‐affiliated clinics.

Objectives The current lack of agreement regarding standardized terminology in musculoskeletal and sports ultrasound presents challenges in education, clinical practice, and research. This consensus was developed to provide a reference to improve clarity and consistency in communication. Methods A multidisciplinary expert panel was convened consisting of 18 members representing multiple specialty societies identified as key stakeholders in musculoskeletal and sports ultrasound. A Delphi process was used to reach consensus which was defined as group level agreement >80%. Results Content was organized into seven general topics including: 1) General Definitions, 2) Equipment and Transducer Manipulation, 3) Anatomic and Descriptive Terminology, 4) Pathology, 5) Procedural Terminology, 6) Image Labeling, and 7) Documentation. Terms and definitions which reached consensus agreement are presented herein. Conclusions The historic use of multiple similar terms in the absence of precise definitions has led to confusion when conveying information between colleagues, patients, and third‐party payers. This multidisciplinary expert consensus addresses multiple areas of variability in diagnostic ultrasound imaging and ultrasound‐guided procedures related to musculoskeletal and sports medicine.

Abstract: Sports ultrasound is commonly used by sports medicine physicians to enhance diagnostic and procedural accuracy. This expert consensus statement serves as an update to the 2015 American Medical Society for Sports Medicine recommended sports ultrasound curriculum for sports medicine fellowships. Although written in the context of the American sports medicine fellowship training model, we present a stepwise progression in both diagnostic and interventional sports ultrasound that may be applicable to the broader sports medicine community. The curriculum is divided into 12 units with each unit including didactic instructional sessions, practical hands-on instruction, independent scanning practice sessions, and mentored clinical experience. To assist with prioritization of learning, we have organized relevant pathology and procedures as essential, desirable, and optional. The expanded content can serve as an outline for continuing education postfellowship or for any physician to further advance their sports ultrasound knowledge and skill. We also provide updated scanning protocols, sample milestones, and a sample objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) to aid fellowships with implementation of the curriculum and ongoing assessment of fellow progress.

Abstract The utility of ultrasound in sports medicine is improving the sports medicine physician's ability to rapidly diagnose and treat a multitude of sports related pathologies. In this article, we clearly outline the current status of the evidence in support of using sports ultrasound in the setting of acute ocular injury, evaluation of elevated intracranial pressures, deep venous thrombosis, and soft tissue complaints.

Background The use of diagnostic and interventional ultrasound has significantly increased over the past decade. A majority of the increased utilisation is by non-radiologists. In sports medicine, ultrasound is often used to guide interventions such as aspirations, diagnostic or therapeutic injections, tenotomies, releases and hydrodissections. Objective Critically review the literature related to the accuracy, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided injections (USGIs) in major, intermediate and small joints; and soft tissues. Design Systematic review of the literature. Results USGIs are more accurate than landmark-guided injections (LMGIs; strength of recommendation taxonomy (SORT) Evidence Rating=A). USGIs are more efficacious than LMGIs (SORT Evidence Rating=B). USGIs are more cost-effective than LMGIs (SORT Evidence Rating=B). Ultrasound guidance is required to perform many new procedures (SORT Evidence Rating=C). Conclusions The findings of this position statement indicate there is strong evidence that USGIs are more accurate than LMGI, moderate evidence that they are more efficacious and preliminary evidence that they are more cost-effective. Furthermore, ultrasound-guided (USG) is required to perform many new, advanced procedures and will likely enable the development of innovative USG surgical techniques in the future.