Tokish, John M.

Background: There has been a surge in interest with regard to the utility of liposomal bupivacaine as part of a perioperative pain management protocol. The current study was proposed to critically assess the efficacy of liposomal bupivacaine as a local anesthetic for pain relief following orthopaedic procedures. Methods: A systematic review of prospective, randomized trials involving liposomal bupivacaine was performed using searches of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The primary outcomes of interest included postoperative subjective pain scores and narcotic consumption. The length of stay and postoperative mobility were reviewed as secondary outcomes. Results: Twenty-seven studies met inclusion criteria and were included for review. Twelve of 17 studies concluded that periarticular or local infiltrative liposomal bupivacaine offered no additive benefit compared with other local anesthetic injections. Peripheral nerve blocks without liposomal bupivacaine conferred more optimal pain relief and decreased narcotic consumption in the immediate postoperative period when compared with liposomal bupivacaine, with no differences thereafter. Twelve studies listed a conflict of interest related to the drug manufacturer (Pacira Pharmaceuticals). Eight of these studies (67%) demonstrated clinical superiority of liposomal bupivacaine when compared with the study control. In the 15 studies that did not show a conflict of interest, only 1 study (7%) demonstrated therapeutic superiority with use of periarticular liposomal bupivacaine when compared with a historical cohort that received no local or regional anesthesia. Conclusions: Current prospective, randomized controlled trials in patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery fail to support the routine use of liposomal bupivacaine compared with other local injectable analgesics, particularly in the setting of knee replacement surgery. We were unable to find consistent support for the potential of superior pain relief and narcotic use reduction with the use of liposomal bupivacaine. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Young age and contact sports have been postulated as risk factors for anterior shoulder instability. Management after shoulder instability is controversial, with studies suggesting that nonoperative management increases the risk of recurrence. Several studies examined return to play after an in-season instability episode, and few followed these patients to determine if they were able to successfully compete in a subsequent season. No study has evaluated this question in a high school athlete population. Purpose: To compare the likelihood of return to scholastic sport and complete the next full season without an additional time-loss injury among athletes with anterior shoulder instability in terms of treatment, instability type, and sport classification. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2 Methods: Athletes were included in this study as identified by a scholastic athletic trainer as experiencing a traumatic time-loss anterior shoulder instability injury related to school-sponsored participation. The cohort was predominantly male (n = 108, 84%) and consisted mostly of contact athletes (n = 101, 78%). All athletes had dislocation or subluxation diagnosed by a board-certified physician who determined the athlete’s course of care (nonoperative vs operative). Successful treatment was defined as completion of care and return to the athlete’s index sport, with full participation for the following season. Chi-square and relative risk analyses were completed to compare success of treatment (nonoperative vs operative care) and instability type. Separate logistic regressions were used to compare the effect of sex and sport classification on the athletes’ ability to return to sport. Statistical significance was set a priori as α = .05. Results: Scholastic athletes (N = 129) received nonoperative (n = 97) or operative (n = 32) care. Nonoperatively treated (85%) and operatively treated (72%) athletes successfully returned to the same sport without injury for at least 1 full season ( P = .11). Players sustaining a dislocation were significantly more likely to fail to return when compared with those sustaining a subluxation (26% vs 89%, P = .013). Sex ( P = .85) and sport classification ( P = .74) did not influence the athlete’s ability to return to sport, regardless of treatment type. Conclusion: A high percentage of athletes with shoulder instability achieved successful return to sport without missing any additional time for shoulder injury. Those with subluxations were at almost 3 times the odds of a successful return compared with those sustaining a dislocation.

Background: Movement toward a value-based health-care system necessitates the development of performance measures to compare physicians, hospitals, and health-care systems. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a potential metric. However, valid use of PROs hinges on the ability to risk-adjust for baseline patient differences across a surgeon’s panel of patients. The purpose of this study was to propose an approach for baseline risk adjustment and evaluate the importance of risk adjustment when comparing surgeons’ performance of rotator cuff repair. Methods: Patients (n = 995) treated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by 34 surgeons from 2010 to 2017 were identified from a large sports medicine clinical data registry. A linear regression model was used to adjust for baseline PROs, patient demographics, and clinical characteristics to predict American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) change scores for each surgeon. A risk-adjusted performance measure was calculated as the difference between the average unadjusted ASES change scores and the risk-adjusted predicted ASES change scores across all patients treated by a surgeon. Results: The differences between unadjusted and risk-adjusted performance scores varied widely across surgeons (range, −13.8 to 10.3 ASES points). Use of the risk-adjusted performance scores resulted in a dramatic change in the relative ranking of surgeons, compared with the ranking based on the observed ASES change scores, with 31 of the 34 surgeons’ rank changing following risk adjustment. On average, the observed ASES scores improved from 49.5 ± 17.5 at baseline to 78.0 ± 22.5 at 6 months across all surgeons. In the risk-adjustment model (R 2 = 0.44), male sex, Workers’ Compensation status, higher scores on the Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12), lower baseline ASES scores, fair and poor tendon quality, and night pain all had a significant effect on the predicted ASES change scores (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Our results show wide variation of nearly 25 points in the risk-adjusted 6-month ASES performance difference from the highest to the lowest-performing surgeons. Additionally, 91% of surgeons’ rank changed following risk adjustment. This suggests that performance measurement that does not account for baseline patient characteristics would likely result in incorrect conclusions about a surgeon’s relative performance based on PROs. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: There is an ever-increasing demand for widespread implementation of patient-reported outcomes. However, adoption is slow owing to limitations in clinical infrastructure and resources within busy orthopaedic practices. Prior studies showed the single alpha-numeric evaluation (SANE) score to correlate at a single point in time with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. However, no study has validated the SANE in terms of test-retest reliability, responsiveness, or clinical utility. Purpose: To validate SANE with the ASES across a sample of patients with common orthopaedic shoulder diagnoses. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (n = 77), total shoulder replacement (n = 55), or physical therapy (n = 80) for signs and symptoms of subacromial impingement syndrome (n = 61) or adhesive capsulitis (n = 19) were administered the SANE and ASES at baseline and again at their 3-month follow-up from initial care or surgery (N = 212, mean ± SD age = 52.6 ± 1.2 years, n = 145 women). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC 2,1 ) and standard error of the measurement (SEm) were used to evaluate the test-retest reliability of the SANE and the validity between the SANE and ASES scores. Analysis of variance (treatment group × time) was used to evaluate the responsiveness to treatment, and a receiver operating characteristic curve was used to establish the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the SANE as compared with the ASES (α = .05). Floor and ceiling effects were evaluated as the percentage of patients who scored the highest or lowest score on each tool. Results: The SANE demonstrated good pretreatment reliability (ICC 2,1 = 0.84, SEM = 3.8), similar to the ASES (ICC 2,1 = 0.82, SEM = 3.4). The SANE also showed good agreement with the ASES before and after treatment across all treatment groups (rotator cuff repair, ICC 2,1 = 0.85, SEM = 3.4; total shoulder replacement, ICC 2,1 = 0.72, SEM = 5.2; physical therapy: ICC 2,1 = 0.82, SEM = 2.9). The SANE and ASES displayed similar responsiveness after treatment, with similar mean change and SD within each treatment group. The receiver operating characteristic curve revealed an area under the curve of 0.79 (SE, 0.62; P < .001) and a cutoff of 15% on the SANE, with a sensitivity of 85% to establish the MCID. Acceptable and similar floor and ceiling effects were observed for the ASES (4%) and SANE (9%). Conclusion: The study demonstrates that the SANE is valid for a range of common shoulder diagnoses to assess patient outcomes across operative and nonoperative treatment for shoulder complaints. The MCID of 15% is similar to that of the ASES (11%), suggesting that the SANE is a simple and efficient tool to assess treatment effects for shoulder disorders. Future studies are warranted to confirm these results and compare across other body parts and diagnoses.

Abstract Superior capsular reconstruction has emerged as a promising technique in the treatment of massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. The technical aspects of the surgery continue to evolve, and scientific studies to evaluate these techniques are emerging. One such area of interest concerns the appropriate thickness of the graft and its role as a spacer. The original description of the graft was an autograft tensor fascia lata, which was folded to achieve a thickness of around 8 mm. It has been demonstrated that an 8‐mm graft is superior biomechanically to a 4‐mm graft, which exceeds the typical human dermal allograft thickness. Herein we describe a technique in which an acellular human dermal allograft was used to perform a superior capsular reconstruction and the remainder of the graft was used to resurface the undersurface of the acromion. This modification of the technique allows for arthroscopic acromial resurfacing, as well as effectively doubling the thickness of the spacer function of the graft. The technique and justification are described in detail, and this has become the senior author's standard approach to the massive irreparable rotator cuff tear in patients with Hamada stages 2 and 3. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

Background: Ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injury of the elbow is a common and debilitating problem seen frequently among elite baseball pitchers. Ultrasound is a useful diagnostic tool in evaluating UCL injuries. Hypothesis: Evaluation with stress ultrasound of the elbow to measure the morphology of the UCL and the ulnohumeral joint space gapping is indicative of higher risk of UCL injury among professional baseball pitchers. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Ultrasound imaging was used to assess the medial joint laxity of the elbow of 70 asymptomatic professional baseball pitchers during spring training. Medial joint laxity and UCL morphology were assessed with OsiriX imaging software under 2 conditions—gravity valgus load and 5.5 lb of valgus load per a handheld dynamometer—with the shoulder in the maximal cocking position and the elbow in 90° of flexion. Two trials of resting position, elbow gapping, and UCL thickness were collected, measured, and averaged for data analysis. Intra- and interrater reliabilities were established and maintained, with intraclass correlation coefficients in the acceptable range for all measures (0.84-0.99). One-way analysis of variance was used to compare dominant variables between those pitchers who sustained a subsequent UCL injury and those who did not. A receiver operating curve was used to identify pitchers who, based on elbow gapping measures (by cut score), were at high risk versus low risk for UCL injury. Results: Players who went on to injure the UCL (n = 7) displayed a significantly wider opening under 5.5 lb of applied stress (6.5 ± 1.2 vs 5.3 ± 1.2 mm, P = .01) when compared with pitchers without UCL injury history (n = 63); they also presented a trend toward wider dominant arm resting joint opening (4.9 ± 1.2 vs 4.0 ± 1.1 mm, P = .07). Professional pitchers with valgus stress ulnohumeral joint gapping ≥5.6 mm (area underneath the curve, 0.77; P = .02) of the dominant arm were at a 6-times greater risk of sustaining a UCL tear requiring reconstruction within a season. Conclusion: Our data suggest that ultrasound evaluation of UCL morphology may be indicative of pitchers who are at risk of sustaining UCL injury and that it may improve player assessment.

Background: Atraumatic rotator cuff tear is a common orthopaedic complaint for people >60 years of age. Lack of evidence or consensus on appropriate treatment for this type of injury creates the potential for substantial discretion in treatment decisions. To our knowledge, no study has assessed the implications of this discretion on treatment patterns across the United States. Methods: All Medicare beneficiaries in the United States with a new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed atraumatic rotator cuff tear were identified with use of 2010 to 2012 Medicare administrative data and were categorized according to initial treatment (surgery, physical therapy, or watchful waiting). Treatment was modeled as a function of the clinical and demographic characteristics of each patient. Variation in treatment rates across hospital referral regions and the presence of area treatment signatures, representing the extent that treatment rates varied across hospital referral regions after controlling for patient characteristics, were assessed. Correlations between measures of area treatment signatures and measures of physician access in hospital referral regions were examined. Results: Among patients who were identified as having a new, symptomatic, MRI-confirmed atraumatic rotator cuff tear (n = 32,203), 19.8% were managed with initial surgery; 41.3%, with initial physical therapy; and 38.8%, with watchful waiting. Patients who were older, had more comorbidity, or were female, of non-white race, or dual-eligible for Medicaid were less likely to receive surgery (p < 0.0001). Black, dual-eligible females had 0.42-times (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34 to 0.50) lower odds of surgery and 2.36-times (95% CI, 2.02 to 2.70) greater odds of watchful waiting. Covariate-adjusted odds of surgery varied dramatically across hospital referral regions; unadjusted surgery and physical therapy rates varied from 0% to 73% and from 6% to 74%, respectively. On average, patients in high-surgery areas were 62% more likely to receive surgery than the average patient with identical measured characteristics, and patients in low-surgery areas were half as likely to receive surgery than the average comparable patient. The supply of orthopaedic surgeons and the supply of physical therapists were associated with greater use of initial surgery and physical therapy, respectively. Conclusions: Patient characteristics had a significant influence on treatment for atraumatic rotator cuff tear but did not explain the wide-ranging variation in treatment rates across areas. Local-area physician supply and specialty mix were correlated with treatment, independent of the patient’s measured characteristics.

Objectives: Ultrasound guided fascia-Iliaca blocks have been used for pain control following hip arthroscopy. There is little evidence regarding their effectiveness in comparison to other pain control modalities in hip arthroscopy patients. To compare efficacy of ultrasound guided fascia iliac block with intra-articular ropivacaine in controlling pain after hip arthroscopy. Methods: Between 2015 and 2017, 95 patients undergoing hip arthroscopy were randomly assigned to 2 groups. The first group received an ultrasound-guided fascia-iliaca block with 50-60mLs of 0.35% ropivacaine. The second group received intra-articular injection of 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine at the completion of the surgical case. Primary outcomes were post-operative pain scores in the recovery room, at PACU discharge, at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative and PACU narcotic usage (converted to morphine equivalent use) as well as readmission rates, PACU recovery time and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Results: Postoperative pain across all points did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Intraoperative and PACU narcotics did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Readmission rates, PACU recovery time and PONV did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. There were no associated complications in either group. Conclusion: Ultrasound guided fascia iliaca block for hip arthroscopy had no clinical advantage when compared to one time intra-articular ropivacaine injection. Furthermore, an intraarticular injection decreases costs and is a safe and more efficient modality for postoperative pain control following hip arthroscopy.

Objectives: Early results following arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction(SCR) in patients with massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears are promising. However, no studies have compared patient reported outcomes between SCR or reverse total shoulder(rTSA) and rotator cuff debridement for these patients. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare 1-year outcomes between patients with massive irreparable rotator cuff tears who underwent a SCR, rTSA, or rotator cuff debridement with a concurrent biceps tenotomy or tenodesis. Methods: Patients(n=63) who underwent either SCR(n=21), rTSA(21), or cuff debridement(n=21) and biceps tenotomy or tenodesis for a massive, irreparable rotator cuff tear treated with a minimum 1-year follow up were retrospectively reviewed. Age, sex, BMI, smoking status, Charlson Index, Hamada classification, and ASES scores were recorded and compared using a multivariate ANOVA were used to compare between surgical approaches. A Chi Square analyses were used to compare sex distribution and the Charlson Deyo Index between groups (α=0.05). Results: Overall, patients across the 3 groups were not statistically different in age or follow up ASES score at minimum 14 month follow up ( P> 0.05). There was a significant interaction effect between surgery group and sex (P=0.02) on ASES score but not age ( P=0.08). Univariate F tests revealed that male patients who received an SCR displayed a 10-14% better outcome at follow up compared to other groups (Table 1) which exceeds the reported ASES score MCID. Conclusion: Our results show comparable results across surgical options for massive irreparable cuff tears with good patient reported outcomes. Male patients displayed clinically important greater ASES scores at 1 year follow up. Future studies should evaluate these preliminary results to assess if these preliminary results hold up at longer follow up times.

Background: Controversy exists as to whether the subscapularis should be repaired after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the utility of repairing the subscapularis after reverse shoulder arthroplasty with regard to complications, objective findings, and patient-reported outcome measures. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records for 99 patients who had undergone a lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty with (n = 58) or without (n = 41) subscapularis repair. Outcomes were compared with the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Penn shoulder score (PSS), Veterans RAND (VR)-12, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Demographics, range of motion, and complications were also compared. A 1-way analysis of variance was performed to determine differences in performance and outcome scores, and a chi-square analysis was performed to compare the frequency of complications between groups. Results: There were no significant differences between the repair and no-repair groups in terms of SANE, PSS, ASES, or VR-12 scores. There also were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative ranges of forward elevation (128° versus 123°; p = 0.44) and external rotation (33° versus 29°; p = 0.29), the dislocation rate (5% versus 2%; p = 0.49), or the overall complication rate (9% versus 5%; p = 0.47). Conclusions: The results of the present study suggest that repair of the subscapularis tendon after lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty may not be necessary. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.