PURPOSE OF REVIEW:Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is one of the most common ligamentous injuries suffered by athletes participating in cutting sports. A common misperception is that ACL reconstruction can prevent osteoarthritis (OA). The goal of this paper is to review and discuss the contributing factors for the development of OA following ACL injury. RECENT FINDINGS:There has been interesting new research related to ACL reconstruction. As understanding of knee biomechanics following ACL injury and reconstruction has changed over time, many surgeons have changed their surgical techniques to low anterior drilling to position their femoral tunnel in an attempt to place the ACL in a more anatomic position. Even with this change in the femoral tunnel position, 85% of knees following ACL reconstruction have abnormal tibial motion compared to contralateral non-injured knees. Studies have shown increases in inflammatory cytokines in the knee following ACL injury, and newer MRI sequences have allowed for earlier objective detection of degenerative changes to cartilage following injury. Recent studies have shown that injecting IL-1 receptor antagonist and corticosteroids can modulate the post-injury inflammatory cascade. ACL reconstruction does not prevent the development of OA but can improve knee kinematics and reduce secondary injury to the cartilage and meniscus. Advancements in imaging studies has allowed for earlier detection of degenerative changes in the knee, which has allowed researchers to study how new interventions can alter the course of degenerative change in the knee following ACL injury.

Background

Implant-related symptoms are the most common reason for reoperation after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of midshaft clavicular fractures. Dual mini-fragment plate fixation is a relatively new solution that may decrease implant prominence while maintaining fixation strength and function. There are minimal published data comparing reoperation rates and clinical outcomes between single, superior-plate constructs and dual mini-fragment plate constructs in the fixation of midshaft clavicular fractures. We hypothesized that reducing plate size with the use of dual mini-fragment plating compared with standard, 3.5-mm, superior plating would minimize implant symptoms and the corresponding need for reoperation while still providing sufficient fixation to allow fracture-healing and return to function.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the cases of 44 consecutive patients who underwent ORIF of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures utilizing either a single, 3.5-mm, superior plate construct (21 patients) or a dual, 2.7-mm and 2.4-mm, plate construct (23 patients). Outcomes at a minimum of 2 years were assessed. Primary outcome measures included reoperation for any reason and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section.

Results

There was a 100% union rate in both groups. None (0%) of the 23 patients who received the dual (2.7-mm and 2.4-mm) plate construct and 6 (29%) of the 21 patients who received the single (3.5-mm) plate construct underwent reoperation for implant-related symptoms. Using a Fisher exact test, the rate of reoperation was compared between the groups, and the difference was found to be significant (p = 0.008). Using an unpaired t test, the difference in mean ASES scores was not significant (p = 0.138) between the dual-plate group (98 of 100) and the single superior plate group (96 of 100) with retained implants.

Conclusions

In our comparative retrospective series, dual fixation utilizing a 2.7-mm superior plate and a 2.4-mm anterior plate for the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures was associated with a significantly lower rate of reoperation when compared with single, 3.5-mm, superior plate fixation.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Objective

Recent reports have shown that outpatient shoulder arthroplasty (SA) may be a safe alternative to inpatient management in appropriately selected patients. The purpose was to review the literature reporting on outpatient SA.

Methods

A systematic review of publications on outpatient SA was performed. Included publications discussed patients who were discharged on the same calendar day or within 23 hours from surgery. Articles were categorized by discussions on complications, readmissions, and safety, patient selection, pain management strategies, cost effectiveness, and patient and surgeon satisfaction.

Results

Twenty-six articles were included. Patients undergoing outpatient SA were younger and with a lower BMI than those undergoing inpatient SA. Larger database studies reported more medical complications for patients undergoing inpatient compared to outpatient SA. Articles on pain management strategies discussed both single shot and continuous interscalene blocks with similar outcomes. Both patients and surgeons reported high levels of satisfaction following outpatient SA, and cost analysis studies demonstrated significant cost savings for outpatient SA.

Conclusion

In appropriately selected patients, outpatient SA can be a safe, cost-saving alternative to inpatient care and may lead to high satisfaction of both patients and physicians, though further studies are needed to clarify appropriate utilization of outpatient SA.

Background

Positive-pressure air arthrography and venting of the hip capsule are techniques used to decrease the traction forces needed for joint distraction during hip arthroscopic surgery. Little is known about the effects that these techniques have on postoperative pain.

Hypothesis

Positive-pressure air arthrography and venting during hip arthroscopic surgery will decrease patient-reported pain and narcotic requirements in the acute postoperative setting.

Study design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted to analyze 35 patients who underwent positive-pressure air arthrography and venting to aid joint distraction during hip arthroscopic surgery versus a group with similar demographics, pathologies, and treatments who did not undergo air arthrography. Numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) scores and medication administration including narcotic and nonnarcotic analgesia in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were tracked and compared.

Results

The maximum (7.17 vs 4.97, respectively), minimum (2.43 vs 1.09, respectively), and mean (5.15 vs 3.11, respectively) NPRS scores were all higher in the control group compared with the air arthrogram group (P < .001, P = .007, and P < .001, respectively). The administration of oral morphine equivalents (OMEs) during the PACU stay was significantly lower in the air arthrogram group, with a mean of 36.75 ± 11.37 OMEs, compared with 44.53 ± 16.06 OMEs in the control group (P = .023). There was no difference in postoperative nonopioid medications, such as ketorolac or acetaminophen, given between groups.

Conclusion

Patients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery with air arthrography and venting used to aid distraction had significantly less postoperative pain and required a lower total dosage of opioids during their PACU stay when compared with patients who underwent hip arthroscopic surgery without air arthrography.

Background

There are limited data on the effect of glenoid retroversion in clinical outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate if surgical correction of retroversion affects outcomes following RTSA.

Methods

An institutional database was utilized to identify 177 patients (mean age: 68.2 ± 10.1 years) with minimum 2-year follow-up after primary RTSA. Glenoid version was measured on preoperative and postoperative radiographs. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores and range of motion were collected before and after RTSA. Change in retroversion was determined by comparing preoperative and postoperative glenoid retroversion on radiographs using paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Spearman's rank correlation was used to investigate relationships between ASES scores and glenoid retroversion.

Results

The mean postoperative ASES composite score (75.5 ± 22.7) was significantly higher than preoperative (36.8 ± 19.2; P < .0001). The mean preoperative glenoid retroversion was 9.1 ± 6.7° compared to 6.5 ± 5.1° postoperatively (P < .0001). There was no correlation between postoperative ASES scores and preoperative retroversion (r = .014, P = .85) or postoperative retroversion (r = -.043, P = .57). There was no statistical relationship between postoperative retroversion and range of motion, though there is a risk of inadequate power given the sample size.

Conclusions

Patient-reported outcomes and range of motion measurements following RTSA at short-term follow-up appear to be independent of either preoperative or postoperative glenoid retroversion.