Tagliero, Adam J.

Background: While patients may report painful or prominent hardware after tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO), little is known about the frequency, associated factors, and outcomes after removal of symptomatic hardware. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to investigate the incidence of hardware removal after TTO due to pain or complications, factors associated with hardware removal, and postoperative outcomes after removal. It was hypothesized that clinical outcomes would be similar between patients who underwent TTO without hardware removal and those who underwent TTOs and subsequently hardware removal. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent TTO at a single institution from 2000 to 2023. Age at the time of the index surgery, sex, race, body mass index, number and size of screws, tibial tubercle–trochlear groove distance, and reason for hardware removal were collected retrospectively. Knee radiographs were reviewed for measurement of soft tissue–hardware distance. Patients were contacted via email to capture final patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). A univariate logistic regression model was used to determine factors associated with hardware removal. Results: A total of 152 patients representing 171 knees were included. Of the overall cohort, 38 knees (22.2%) in 32 patients underwent TTO with subsequent hardware removal. The most common reason for hardware removal was anterior knee pain (79%). Compared with patients aged 11 to 20 years, patients aged 21 to 30 years demonstrated higher odds of undergoing hardware removal (OR, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.51-9.44; P = .009). Compared with a soft tissue–hardware distance of 0 to 4.9 mm, a distance of 10.0 to 14.9 mm demonstrated lower odds of hardware removal (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.07-0.84; P = .027). Visual analog scale scores (0-10 scale) improved by a mean of 3.6 points after hardware removal ( P = .003). In patients undergoing hardware removal for pain, no difference in final PROMs was found compared with patients who underwent TTO without hardware removal. Conclusion: Hardware removal in patients undergoing TTO was mainly attributed to hardware-related pain/irritation. On average, pain scores improved after hardware removal. There was no difference in final PROMs between patients who had their hardware removed due to pain (eg, without any clinically relevant concomitant pathology) and patients who did not require hardware removal. Size and number of screws were not associated with a subsequent hardware removal procedure. The thickness of the soft tissue envelope overlying implanted hardware was inconsistently associated with lower odds of hardware removal.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is one of the most common orthopaedic procedures and one of the most well studied. Despite extensive research dedicated to ACLR, there is limited understanding of how chronic inflammatory systemic diseases (CIDs) such as rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus affect outcomes. Purpose: To compare the outcomes of ACLR in cohorts of patients with and without CID. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective query of a regional data set was conducted for all patients who underwent ACLR from 1990 to 2021 for traumatic ACL rupture. All patients with CID were identified and propensity matched to non-CID controls. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were identified through retrospective chart review, and patients were contacted for subjective outcomes. Results: A total of 30 patients with ACLR and a diagnosis of CID were identified. These patients were propensity matched to 120 non-CID controls. Baseline demographic and surgical characteristics demonstrated no statistical differences. Follow-up duration was similar between the CID and non-CID groups (mean, 14.6 vs 14.2 years; P = .868). The CID cohort had a higher arthrofibrosis rate (16.7% vs 4.3%; P = .031), higher osteoarthritis rate (33.3% vs 16.7%; P = .041), higher total knee arthroplasty (TKA) rate (16.7% vs 3.3%; P = .016), and earlier time to TKA (14.7 vs 23.5 years; P = .032). Knee range of motion, infection rate, retear rate, time to retear, and time to osteoarthritis were not statistically different between the cohorts. The CID cohort had higher visual analog scale pain scores (mean, 2.00 vs 1.20; P = .043) but slightly higher satisfaction (mean, 3.92 vs 3.39; P = .043). There were no differences in preinjury Tegner, postoperative Tegner, change in Tegner, or IKDC score. In a univariate Cox regression model, the CID cohort had a retear hazard ratio of 1.43 (95% CI, 0.46-4.51; P = .537). Kaplan-Meier survival revealed no significant differences in retear-free survival between the CID and non-CID cohorts at 25 years (85.7% vs 87.3%; P = .53). The CID cohort had a TKA hazard ratio of 3.94 (95% CI, 1.05-14.8; P = .042). Kaplan-Meier survival demonstrated significantly decreased TKA-free survival at 25 years in the CID cohort (64.9% vs 91.2%; P = .029). Conclusion: CID increases the incidence of arthrofibrosis, osteoarthritis, and TKA in those undergoing ACLR. Patients with CID also undergo TKA significantly sooner than non-CID counterparts. Notably, the majority of patient-reported outcome measures are no worse in patients who have a CID diagnosis. Thus, ACLR constructs themselves may not necessarily fare worse in patients with CID. Nonetheless, these patients need to be cautiously counseled on the clinical outlook after their ACLR.

Background: Surgical repair of full thickness biceps tears has demonstrated adequate outcomes in short and mid-term studies. However, data on the long-term outcomes of full thickness distal biceps injuries and their treatment are currently lacking. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to report on patient demographics, injury characteristics, and long-term outcomes for patients with full-thickness distal biceps tears. It was hypothesized that complete distal biceps tears managed operatively would demonstrate robust clinical success at long-term follow-up. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients with magnetic resonance imaging–confirmed, complete distal biceps tendon rupture sustained between 1996 and 2016 were identified. Patients were cross-referenced with a regional geographic database. Results: A total of 66 patients (3 female, 63 male) with a median age of 50.8 years (IQR, 41.5-60.4) and a median clinical follow-up of 14.7 years (IQR, 9.6-17.9 years) were included. Patients who sustained a full-thickness distal biceps tendon tear were likely to be in their early 50s, male, right-hand dominant, current/former smokers, and laborers with a history of traumatic injury during an intentional movement. Most of these patients had pain and supination weakness but no loss of range of motion. All included tears were treated operatively. At final follow-up, patients maintained a majority of near-normal range of motion (median total arc of flexion/extension 140° and supination/pronation 80°), excellent elbow flexion strength (91% of patients had full strength), and adequate elbow supination strength (76% of patients had full strength). The overall complication rate was 24%, with 16 out of 66 patients experiencing some type of complication between infection, rerupture, heterotopic ossification, reoperation, and nerve complications. Overall return to work was 98%, and 85% of those who returned to work did so without restrictions. Conclusion: Complete tears of the distal biceps were most common in patients 50 years of age, male sex, right-hand dominant, and current/former smokers. The most common profession was laborer, and injuries were primarily traumatic in nature during intentional activity. Patients managed operatively demonstrated high rates of success at long-term follow-up with respect to elbow function and clinical outcomes.

Background: Value-based decision-making regarding nonoperative management versus early surgical stabilization for first-time anterior shoulder instability (ASI) events remains understudied. Purpose: To perform (1) a systematic review of the current literature and (2) a Markov model–based cost-effectiveness analysis comparing an initial trial of nonoperative management to arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) for first-time ASI. Study Design: Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A Markov chain Monte Carlo probabilistic model was developed to evaluate the outcomes and costs of 1000 simulated patients (mean age, 20 years; range, 12-26 years) with first-time ASI undergoing nonoperative management versus ABR. Utility values, recurrence rates, and transition probabilities were derived from the published literature. Costs were determined based on the typical patient undergoing each treatment strategy at the authors’ institution. Outcome measures included costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results: The Markov model with Monte Carlo microsimulation demonstrated mean (± standard deviation) 10-year costs for nonoperative management and ABR of $38,649 ± $10,521 and $43,052 ± $9352, respectively. Total QALYs acquired over the 10-year time horizon were 7.67 ± 0.43 and 8.44 ± 0.46 for nonoperative management and ABR, respectively. The ICER comparing ABR with nonoperative management was found to be just $5725/QALY, which falls substantially below the $50,000 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. The mean numbers of recurrences were 2.55 ± 0.31 and 1.17 ± 0.18 for patients initially assigned to the nonoperative and ABR treatment groups, respectively. Of 1000 samples run over 1000 trials, ABR was the optimal strategy in 98.7% of cases, with nonoperative management the optimal strategy in 1.3% of cases. Conclusion: ABR reduces the risk for recurrent dislocations and is more cost-effective despite higher upfront costs when compared with nonoperative management for first-time ASI in the young patient. While all these factors are important to consider in surgical decision-making, ultimate treatment decisions should be made on an individual basis and occur through a shared decision-making process.

Background: Rupture of the pectoralis major is most commonly seen with eccentric contraction mechanisms, and surgical options in the setting of acute tear include direct repair, endocortical buttons, suture anchors, and transosseous tunnel fixation. This technique video will detail repair using a unicortical endobutton fixation construct. Indications: Surgical repair is indicated for acute, complete pectoralis major tears; incomplete tears involving rupture of the sternal head with intact clavicular head; and tears in the young, active, high-demand demographic. Delay in diagnosis increases the risk of tendon retraction and fatty atrophy. Recent literature has shown that acute repair is superior to chronic repair in functional outcome, pain relief, and overall cosmesis. Technique Description: A beach-chair position and a deltopectoral approach are used to identify and mobilize the torn and retracted sternal head of the pectoralis major. A No. 2 SutureTape is then passed through the disrupted sternal head in a Krackow fashion to allow for a 6-strand repair. Two of the suture strands are then shuttled through the endocortical button. A drill is used to create a corticectomy for endobutton placement, which is secured into place by sequentially tightening each limb. Two additional endobuttons are placed in a similar fashion to complete the construct. Results: Outcomes studies regarding patients with pectoralis major tendon ruptures who underwent endocortical button fixation reveal that 83% of patients had good or excellent outcomes in a recent systematic review. Another study showed no significant difference in functional outcomes, return to activity, or complication rate with endocortical button fixation compared with other mechanisms of fixation. Discussion/Conclusion: Unicortical endobutton fixation can provide another fixation strategy for acute pectoralis major tears in young, active high-demand individuals. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

Abstract Radial meniscal tears can be challenging to address and require advanced arthroscopic techniques for satisfactory repair. When radial tears occur in older patients, the surgeon often encounters suboptimal tissue integrity that presents its own challenges. Incorporating ripstop sutures in tie‐grip repair constructs for radial tears has been documented in the literature with favorable biomechanical properties. This Technical Note and accompanying video present a reproducible method for incorporating tie‐grip and mobile ripstop stitches to fortify traditional meniscal repair configurations for radial tears. This technique augments the biomechanical strength of repair and may prove useful in poor tissue quality and areas of small focal deficiency, especially in scenarios with repairable but degenerative meniscal tissue. This is particularly relevant considering many repairs fail due to pull‐through of sutures within the meniscal tissue. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

Objectives: While uncommon, acute traumatic patellar dislocations can lead to recurrent symptoms of patellar instability in 15% to 45% of patients. Patellar stability is an interplay of bony and soft tissue restraints as well as anatomic factors, however, a mainstay of treatment remains reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL). Instability events can lead to intra-articular derangements of the knee, both in the acute and chronic patellar instability setting. These findings may not always be appropriately identified on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The incidence of these “surprise” injuries have not been previously reported. The purpose of this study is to determine the rates of coexisting intra-articular pathology in patients with patellar instability requiring MPFL reconstruction and elucidate any discordance between preoperative MRI findings and diagnostic arthroscopy findings. Methods: All patients undergoing MPFL reconstruction at a single institution between 2010 and 2023 were identified and preoperative MRI reports, defined as the most recent MRI report to the date of surgery with no interval traumatic events, were queried. Records without full MRI reports as read by a radiologist or cases in which a diagnostic arthroscopy was not conducted were excluded. MRI findings were discordant from arthroscopic findings if a lesion identified on diagnostic arthroscopy was not present in the full MRI report. Procedures that were undertaken because of these missed pathologies on MRI were recorded. Results: A total of 640 patients were identified during the study period, and 507 complete records were ultimately included. Preoperative MRI identified patellar osteochondral lesions or cartilage fissures in 333 patients (66%), loose bodies in 119 patients (24%), lateral femoral condyle osteochondral lesions or fissures in 97 patients (19%) and meniscus tears in 47 patients (9%). Among these patients, 172 (34%) had a diagnosis at the time of arthroscopy which was not identified on the preoperative MRI. These arthroscopic findings resulted in 75 loose body removals, 74 patellar shaving chondroplasties, 16 partial meniscectomies, 3 microfractures, 3 osteochondral lesion open reduction internal fixation, and 2 meniscal repairs which would have been missed without diagnostic arthroscopy due to discordant MRI findings. Conclusions: Over one-third of patients at a single institution who underwent diagnostic arthroscopy in the setting of patellar instability surgery had pathology identified which required surgical intervention that was not reported on a preoperative MRI. A comparison of MRI and diagnostic arthroscopy has been extensively reported on for other knee pathologies including ACL tear and lateral meniscal tear; however, there has been no similar investigation of the reliability of MRI for identification of concomitant pathology in the setting of patellar instability to date. The findings of this study highlight the importance of diagnostic arthroscopy in the treatment of patellar instability, the frequency with which this altered treatment, and the high preponderance of discordant MRI findings.

Background: Snapping biceps femoris syndrome (SFS) represents a rare clinical entity in which the biceps femoris subluxates over the fibular head in deep flexion. Two primary pathophysiologies have been described including a prominent or abnormal fibular head morphology. Others have implicated an anomalous biceps femoris insertion. The diagnosis is made clinically, with operative and nonoperative intervention strategies available for treatment. Indications: SFS often results in audible snapping and associated pain at the lateral fibular head. When recalcitrant to nonoperative management, surgical intervention can lead to resolution of symptoms. We present the case of a college-aged male who has bilateral symptoms, worse on the right, which have resulted in significant activity modification and daily discomfort recalcitrant to anti-inflammatory medication and physical therapy. Technique Description: The patient was placed supine on the operating room table with an ipsilateral bump under the hip to assist in exposure of the lateral aspect of the knee. Examination under anesthesia (EUA) confirmed the snapping biceps femoris. A lateral approach to the knee and a common peroneal neurolysis was performed. The biceps femoris insertional anatomy was examined for anomalous tendon insertion or insertional tearing. The prominent fibular head was exposed and resected, with careful attention not to disrupt the lateral collateral ligament or popliteofibular ligament insertion sites. The biceps femoris was then repaired to the prepared bony bed of the fibula with one double-loaded suture anchor. Repeat EUA confirmed complete resolution of snapping even with maximal internal rotation of the tibia; this was carefully examined again with the tourniquet deflated to ensure its compressive effect was not partially responsible for the resolution. Results: Published data pertaining to SFS is limited to case reports and small case series. With appropriate indications, surgical intervention yields promising results with a high percentage of patients returning to prior level of activity or prior participation level in sport. Discussion/Conclusion: SFS can be diagnosed with a careful clinical assessment. When recalcitrant to nonoperative management, it is effectively treated with surgical intervention to restore normal fibular anatomy, and prevent recurrent instability and persistent pain. The presented technique allows for appropriate management of these rare injuries. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries to soccer players present unique challenges in sports medicine, given the sport’s global prevalence and intricate injury dynamics. These injuries, especially in the youth and female demographic, have become a substantial concern in sports medicine. This review explores the epidemiology, mechanism of injury, diagnostic procedures, treatment modalities, and rehabilitation strategies related to ACL tears within the soccer community. Progress in diagnostics, treatments, and rehabilitation underscores the importance of evidence-based approaches. As soccer continues its ascent in popularity, addressing the specific risks and nuances of ACL injuries in this context remains of paramount significance.

Abstract Unstable osteochondritis dissecans lesions of the medial femoral condyle have classically been treated with open reduction and fixation under direct visualization through an open arthrotomy. Given the value of avoiding open arthrotomies, we present an arthroscopic approach for lesion elevation, debridement, and fixation. The lesion is first elevated using an arthroscopic elevator, leaving a laterally based osseous hinge. Once elevated, fibrous debris is debrided from the base of the lesion. Subsequently, the fragment is reduced, and percutaneous transpatellar instrumentation is used for fixation. The use of this technique allows for excellent mobilization, debridement, and fixation of the osteochondritis dissecans lesion while minimizing violation of periarticular soft tissues. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.