Camp, Christopher L.

Purpose To develop a deep learning model for the detection of Segond fractures on anteroposterior (AP) knee radiographs and to compare model performance to that of trained human experts. Methods AP knee radiographs were retrieved from the Hospital for Special Surgery ACL Registry, which enrolled patients between 2009 and 2013. All images corresponded to patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by 1 of 23 surgeons included in the registry data. Images were categorized into 1 of 2 classes based on radiographic evidence of a Segond fracture and manually annotated. Seventy percent of the images were used to populate the training set, while 20% and 10% were reserved for the validation and test sets, respectively. Images from the test set were used to compare model performance to that of expert human observers, including an orthopaedic surgery sports medicine fellow and a fellowship‐trained orthopaedic sports medicine surgeon with over 10 years of experience. Results A total of 324 AP knee radiographs were retrieved, of which 34 (10.4%) images demonstrated evidence of a Segond fracture. The overall mean average precision (mAP) was 0.985, and this was maintained on the Segond fracture class (mAP = 0.978, precision = 0.844, recall = 1). The model demonstrated 100% accuracy with perfect sensitivity and specificity when applied to the independent testing set and the ability to meet or exceed human sensitivity and specificity in all cases. Compared to an orthopaedic surgery sports medicine fellow, the model required 0.3% of the total time needed to evaluate and classify images in the independent test set. Conclusions A deep learning model was developed and internally validated for Segond fracture detection on AP radiographs and demonstrated perfect accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity on a small test set of radiographs with and without Segond fractures. The model demonstrated superior performance compared with expert human observers. Clinical Relevance Deep learning can be used for automated Segond fracture identification on radiographs, leading to improved diagnosis of easily missed concomitant injuries, including lateral meniscus tears. Automated identification of Segond fractures can also enable large‐scale studies on the incidence and clinical significance of these fractures, which may lead to improved management and outcomes for patients with knee injuries.

Context: The quality and interprogram variability of publicly available throwing programs have not been assessed. Objective: To (1) identify publicly available interval throwing programs, (2) describe their components and structure, and (3) evaluate their quality, variability, and completeness. Data Sources: Google, Bing, Yahoo; keyword: “interval throwing program.” Study Selection: Baseball-specific publicly available programs. Study Design: Systematic review. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Data Extraction: Independent evaluation by 2 authors using a novel 21-item Quality Assessment Rubric (QAR). Results: Of the 99 included programs, 54% were designed for return from injury/surgery; 42% explicitly stated no expected timeline for completion, and approximately 40% did not provide criteria to initiate the program. Program construction was highly variable. There were broad-ranging shortest (mean: 40±8 ft, range: 20-45 ft) and longest (mean: 150±33 ft, range: 90-250 ft) long toss distances, and variable maximum numbers of mound pitches thrown before returning to game play (range: 40-120, mean: 85). Only 63% of programs provided guidelines for handling setbacks, and standardized warm-ups, arm care, and concomitant training were absent in 32%, 63%, and 47% of programs, respectively. Mean QAR completion rate and QAR item response rate were low (62 ± 4% [range, 24-91%], 62 ± 24% [range, 7-99%], respectively). Finally, only 20 (20%) programs provided at least 1 peer-reviewed reference, most of which were published >10 years ago. Conclusion: Publicly available interval throwing programs are readily available but demonstrate significant interprogram heterogeneity across multiple areas including target audience, program construction, progression, and execution. The quality and consistency of publicly available interval throwing programs is poor at this time, which may limit their utility and effectiveness for baseball players attempting to return to competition. This work identifies a multitude of deficiencies in currently available throwing programs that should be targets of future improvement efforts.

Background: Managing patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability and glenoid bony deficiency remains a challenge. Multiple graft options, including iliac crest, distal clavicle, coracoid, and distal tibia allograft have been used. There is a growing body of evidence that supports distal tibia allograft for glenoid restoration in patients with shoulder instability due to its ability to restore the articular surface as well as the glenoid depth and curvature. Indications: Surgical indications for anterior glenoid reconstruction with distal tibia allograft combined with open capsular shift include patients with recurrent shoulder instability and glenoid bone loss. Technique Description: A deltopectoral interval is utilized and the subscapularis is split in lines with its fibers. The subscapularis and capsule are split together in a horizontal fashion and tagged together. Any prior hardware is then removed utilizing appropriate removal sets, a burr, and a broken screw set if necessary. The anterior glenoid is then prepared and the defect is measured. Bone marrow aspirate is then harvested from the proximal humerus using a vortex needle. The distal tibia allograft is then cut to size and prepared utilizing pulsed lavage, pressurized sterile carbon dioxide, and the bone marrow aspirate. The allograft is then fixed with solid stainless steel 3.5-mm cortical screws with washers. The medial, glenoid based capsular repair it completed by placing 1.8-mm knotless FiberTak anchor at the bottom of the distal tibia allograft. A free needle is utilized to place a horizontal mattress stitch from the anchor to the inferior capsule, which is then loaded onto a shuttling suture, to repair it to the anterior inferior glenoid. A knotless anchor is then placed right off the chondral margin of the humeral head, and this is used to repair both the capsule and subscapularis in the correct position by passing through both inferior and superior leaflets. This is then loaded onto the knotless anchor and reduced, which shifts the subscapularis and capsule laterally. The remainder of the subscapularis split is then closed. Patients are then placed in a sling with an abduction pillow with no shoulder range of motion for 6 weeks. They can then progress their therapy with a goal of returning to sport at 6 months. Results: Several large systemic reviews have shown that return to sport rates after anterior glenoid reconstruction range between 80% and 90%, with returning to the same level of play in the 70% range. Discussion: Anterior glenoid reconstruction utilizing distal tibia allograft combined with an open capsular shift is a durable surgical option for patients presenting with shoulder instability and glenoid bone loss. 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.

AbstractDeep learning is a subset of artificial intelligence (AI) with enormous potential to transform orthopaedic surgery. As has already become evident with the deployment of Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT (OpenAI Inc.), deep learning can rapidly enter clinical and surgical practices. As such, it is imperative that orthopaedic surgeons acquire a deeper understanding of the technical terminology, capabilities and limitations associated with deep learning models. The focus of this series thus far has been providing surgeons with an overview of the steps needed to implement a deep learning‐based pipeline, emphasizing some of the important technical details for surgeons to understand as they encounter, evaluate or lead deep learning projects. However, this series would be remiss without providing practical examples of how deep learning models have begun to be deployed and highlighting the areas where the authors feel deep learning may have the most profound potential. While computer vision applications of deep learning were the focus of Parts I and II, due to the enormous impact that natural language processing (NLP) has had in recent months, NLP‐based deep learning models are also discussed in this final part of the series. In this review, three applications that the authors believe can be impacted the most by deep learning but with which many surgeons may not be familiar are discussed: (1) registry construction, (2) diagnostic AI and (3) data privacy. Deep learning‐based registry construction will be essential for the development of more impactful clinical applications, with diagnostic AI being one of those applications likely to augment clinical decision‐making in the near future. As the applications of deep learning continue to grow, the protection of patient information will become increasingly essential; as such, applications of deep learning to enhance data privacy are likely to become more important than ever before.Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Background: Based in part on the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that suggest a beneficial effect over alternative treatment options, the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) is widespread and increasing. However, the extent to which these studies are vulnerable to slight variations in the outcomes of patients remains unknown. Purpose: To evaluate the statistical fragility of conclusions from RCTs that reported outcomes of patients with knee OA who were treated with PRP versus alternative nonoperative management strategies. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: All RCTs comparing PRP with alternative nonoperative treatment options for knee OA were identified. The fragility index (FI) and reverse FI were applied to assess the robustness of conclusions regarding the efficacy of PRP for knee OA. Meta-analyses were performed to determine the minimum number of patients from ≥1 trials included in the meta-analysis for which a modification on the event status would change the statistical significance of the pooled treatment effect. Results: In total, this analysis included outcomes from 1993 patients with a mean ± SD age of 58.0 ± 3.8 years. The mean number of events required to reverse significance of individual RCTs (FI) was 4.57 ± 5.85. Based on random-effects meta-analyses, PRP demonstrated a significantly higher rate of successful outcomes when compared with hyaluronic acid ( P = .002; odds ratio [OR], 2.19; 95% CI, 1.33-3.62), as well as higher rates of patient-reported symptom relief ( P = .019; OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.07-2.24), not requiring a reintervention after the initial injection treatment ( P = .002; OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.33-3.53), and achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for pain improvement ( P = .007; OR, 6.19; 95% CI, 1.63-23.42) when compared with all alternative nonoperative treatments. Overall, the mean number of events per meta-analysis required to change the statistical significance of the pooled treatment effect was 8.67 ± 4.50. Conclusion: Conclusions drawn from individual RCTs evaluating PRP for knee OA demonstrated slight robustness. On meta-analysis, PRP demonstrated a significant advantage over hyaluronic acid as well as improved symptom relief, lower rates of reintervention, and more frequent achievement of the MCID for pain improvement when compared with alternative nonoperative treatment options. Statistically significant pooled treatment effects evaluating PRP for knee OA are more robust than approximately half of all comparable meta-analyses in medicine and health care. Future RCTs and meta-analyses should consider reporting FIs and fragility quotients to facilitate interpretation of results in their proper context.

Purpose To compile and analyze structural and clinical outcomes after meniscus root tear treatment as currently described in the literature. Methods A review was conducted to identify studies published since 2011 on efficacy of repair, meniscectomy, and nonoperative management in the treatment of meniscus root tears. Patient cohorts were grouped into treatment categories, with medial and lateral root tears analyzed separately; data were collected on patient demographics, structural outcomes including joint space width, degree of medial meniscal extrusion, progression to total knee arthroplasty, and patient‐reported outcome measures. Risk of bias was assessed using the MINORS (methodological index for non‐randomized studies) criteria. Heterogeneity was measured using the I‐statistic, and outcomes were summarized using forest plots without pooled means. Results The 56 included studies comprised a total of 3,191 patients. Mean age among the included studies ranged from 24.6 to 65.6 years, whereas mean follow‐up ranged from 12 to 125.9 months. Heterogeneity analysis identified significant differences between studies. Change in joint space width ranged from –2.4 to –0.6 mm (i.e., decreased space) after meniscectomy (n = 186) and –0.9 to –0.1 mm after root repair (n = 209); change in medial meniscal extrusion ranged from –0.6 to 6.5 mm after root repair (n = 521) and 0.2 to 4.2 mm after meniscectomy (n = 66); and event rate for total knee arthroplasty ranged from 0.00 to 0.22 after root repair (n = 205), 0.35 to 0.60 after meniscectomy (n = 53), and 0.27 to 0.35 after nonoperative treatment (n = 93). Root repair produced the greatest numerical increase in International Knee Documentation Committee and Lysholm scores of the 3 treatment arms. In addition, root repair improvements in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Pain (range: 22‐32), Sports and Recreational Activities (range: 23‐36), Quality of Life (range: 22‐42), and Symptoms subscales (range: 10‐19), in studies with low risk of bias. Conclusions The literature reporting on the treatment of meniscus root tears is heterogenous and largely limited to Level III and IV studies. Current evidence suggests root repair may be the most effective treatment strategy in lessening joint space narrowing of the knee and producing improvements in patient‐reported outcomes. Level of Evidence Level IV, systematic review of Level II‐IV studies.

Background: Wrestling is a physically demanding sport with young athletes prone to traumatic shoulder instability and a paucity of data evaluating the results of shoulder instability surgery (SIS). Purpose: To assess reoperation rates, patient-reported outcomes, and return to wrestling (RTW) after SIS in a cohort of competitive wrestlers. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All competitive wrestlers with a history of shoulder instability and subsequent surgery at a single institution between 1996 and 2020 were identified. All directions of shoulder instability (anterior shoulder instability [ASI], posterior shoulder instability [PSI], and traumatic multidirectional shoulder instability [TMDI]) were analyzed. Exclusions included revision SIS and <2 years of follow-up. Athletes were contacted for determination of complications, RTW, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores. Results: Ultimately, 104 wrestlers were included with a mean age at initial instability of 16.9 years (range, 12.0-22.7 years), mean age at surgery of 18.9 years (range, 14.0-29.0 years), and a mean follow-up of 5.2 years (range, 2.0-22.0 years). A total of 58 (55.8%) wrestlers were evaluated after a single shoulder instability event, while 46 (44.2%) sustained multiple events before evaluation. ASI was the most common direction (n = 79; 76.0%), followed by PSI (n = 14; 13.5%) and TMDI (n = 11; 10.6%). Surgical treatment was most commonly an arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization (n = 88; 84.6%), with open soft tissue repair (n = 13; 12.5%) and open bony augmentation (n = 3; 2.9%) performed less frequently. RTW occurred in 57.3% of wrestlers at a mean of 9.8 months. Recurrent instability was the most common complication, occurring in 18 (17.3%) wrestlers. Revision SIS was performed in 15 (14.4%) wrestlers. Across the entire cohort, survivorship rates free from recurrent instability and revision surgery were 90.4% and 92.5% at 2 years, 71.9% and 70.7% at 5 years, and 71.9% and 66.5% at 10 years, respectively. Preoperative recurrent instability was an independent risk factor for postoperative recurrent instability (hazard ratio, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.33-11.03; P = .012). Conclusion: Competitive wrestlers with multiple dislocations before initial clinical evaluation were 3.8 times more likely to experience postoperative recurrent instability. Patients should be counseled that despite SIS, only 57.3% returned to wrestling after surgery.

Background: Treatment of ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tears with suture tape augmentation has gained interest given preliminary reports of favorable biomechanical characteristics. No study to date has quantitatively assessed the biomechanical effects of multiple augmentation techniques relative to the native UCL. Purpose: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled laboratory studies to assess and comparatively rank biomechanical effects of UCL repair or reconstruction with or without augmentation. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: PubMed, OVID/Medline, and Cochrane databases were queried in January 2023. A frequentist network meta-analytic approach was used to perform mixed-treatment comparisons of UCL repair and reconstruction techniques with and without augmentation, with the native UCL as the reference condition. Pooled treatment estimates were quantified under the random-effects assumption. Competing treatments were ranked in the network meta-analysis by using point estimates and standard errors to calculate P scores (greater P score indicates superiority of treatment for given outcome). Results: Ten studies involving 206 elbow specimens in which a distal UCL tear was simulated were included. UCL reconstruction with suture tape augmentation (AugRecon) restored load to failure to a statistically noninferior magnitude (mean difference [MD], –1.99 N·m; 95% CI, –10.2 to 6.2 N·m; P = .63) compared with the native UCL. UCL reconstruction (Recon) (MD, –12.7 N·m; P < .001) and UCL repair with suture tape augmentation (AugRepair) (MD, –14.8 N·m; P < .001) were both statistically inferior to the native UCL. The AugRecon condition conferred greater load to failure compared with Recon ( P < .001) and AugRepair ( P = .002) conditions. AugRecon conferred greater torsional stiffness relative to all other conditions and was not statistically different from the native UCL (MD, 0.32 N·m/deg; 95% CI, –0.30 to 0.95 N·m/deg; P = .31). Medial ulnohumeral gapping was not statistically different for the AugRepair (MD, 0.30 mm; 95% CI, –1.22 to 1.82 mm; P = .70), AugRecon (MD, 0.57 mm; 95% CI, –0.70 to 1.84 mm; P = .38), or Recon (MD, 1.02 mm; 95% CI, –0.02 to 2.05 mm; P = .055) conditions compared with the native UCL. P-score analysis indicated that AugRecon was the most effective treatment for increasing ultimate load to failure and torsional stiffness, whereas AugRepair was the most effective for minimizing medial gapping. Conclusion: AugRecon restored load to failure and torsional stiffness most similar to the parameters of the native UCL, whereas Recon and AugRepair did not restore the same advantageous properties at time zero. Medial ulnohumeral gapping during a valgus load was minimized by all 3 treatments. Based on network interactions, AugRecon was the superior treatment approach for restoring important biomechanical features of the UCL at time zero that are jeopardized during a complete distal tear.

Background: Irreparable rotator cuff tears represent approximately 12% of all presenting cuff tears, and multiple surgical techniques have been described for treatment, including allograft/bridge augmentation, debridement, partial repair, subacromial balloon, tendon transfer, and superior capsule reconstruction (SCR). SCR has demonstrated durable improvement in range of motion (ROM) and outcome scores at 2 and 5 years. Indications: Surgical indications for SCR include an irreparable tear of the supraspinatus and/or infraspinatus with a preserved or reparable subscapularis and preserved glenohumeral joint cartilage. Technique Description: Diagnostic arthroscopy is performed to identify and characterize the rotator cuff tear. Thorough debridement of the greater tuberosity is performed. Two all-suture FiberTak anchors are placed in the superior aspect of the glenoid. Two 2.6-mm FiberTak suture anchors are placed in the humeral head at the chondral margin. After measuring, the dermal allograft is cut to size with 15-mm overhang left on the far lateral edge. A 12-mm passport cannula is inserted laterally and the sutures from the glenoid and humeral head anchors are brought out through the cannula maintaining their position and orientation. The sutures are passed through the graft outside the cannula. The graft is introduced into the shoulder via the passport cannula with a back grasper. A cannula-in-cannula technique is used to tie the glenoid anchors first and then the medial row anchors. Two lateral row swivel lock anchors are used to complete a standard double row repair. Margin convergence is performed between the dermal allograft and remaining rotator cuff anterior and posterior. Postoperatively, patients are kept in a sling for 6 weeks, with no shoulder ROM. From weeks 6 to 12, patients discontinue sling and begin passive progression to active ROM. Strengthening is initiated at 12 weeks, and return-to-sport or work is at approximately 6 months. Results: Irreparable rotator cuff tears treated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and SCR show durable improvement in patient-reported outcomes at 2 and 5 years. Re-tear rates did not differ between athletes and non-athletes. Discussion/Conclusion: Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with SCR is a durable and reliable surgical option for patients presenting with preserved glenohumeral joint and irreparable supraspinatus and/or infraspinatus tear. 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.

Background: Medial-sided elbow injuries are becoming increasingly common among throwing athletes due to overuse and increased specialization at early ages. High valgus stress and repetitive elbow flexion/extension during throwing not only affects the ligaments and dynamic support of the elbow, but commonly affects the ulnar nerve. Indications: Management of cubital tunnel syndrome is initially rest, therapy, and functional training; however, if conservative measures do not appropriately address the ulnar neuropathy, surgical decompression with subcutaneous transposition is a reliable treatment option. Technique Description: An incision is created over the medial epicondyle. The medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve is identified and protected. The ulnar nerve is identified and tagged with a vessel loop to allow for appropriate handling of the nerve. Decompression of the ulnar nerve begins proximally by spreading the tissues superficial to the ulnar nerve and splitting the fascia overlying it. Then, dissection deep to the nerve is performed. A small strip of the medial intermuscular septum will be used as a sling to hold the nerve securely in the transposed position. This is released proximally and the distal attachment to the medial epicondyle is left in place. Decompression is then continued distally by releasing the superficial fascia over the flexor carpi ulnaris (FCU) and a portion of the deep FCU muscle belly and fascia. The nerve is decompressed circumferentially, while preserving penetrating branches to the FCU as able. Ultimately, the ulnar nerve is decompressed 10 cm proximal and 10 cm distal to the medial epicondyle. The intermuscular septum is then pulled over the nerve, checked for appropriate length, and sutured in place both posterior and anterior to the ulnar nerve. Results: Symptom improvement after decompression and transposition is high (>90%); however, performance outcomes in overhead and throwing athletes is variable, and return to previous or higher level of play ranges from 60% to 90%. Discussion/Conclusion: Ulnar nerve decompression and transposition can reliably address underlying symptoms, but results are mixed for return to sport outcomes in overhead and throwing athletes. 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.