High dose rate brachytherapy in the management of anal cancer: A review.

PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review evaluating the impact of high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy (BT) on the clinical outcomes and toxicities of patients with anal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A search of Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed using search terms: "anal", "anal canal", "squamous", "adenocarcinoma", "cancer", "neoplasm", in combination with "brachytherapy", "high dose rate brachytherapy" or "HDR brachytherapy". Additional studies were identified after scanning references. Studies published in English with ≥10 patients were included. RESULTS: Ten studies (n = 448) were included in this review. 321 patients were treated with curative intent external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), chemotherapy (CT) and HDRBT; of those, 312 and 9 received interstitial and intraluminal BT, respectively. Mean follow up was 39.9 months (range (R): 24-61 months). Complete response was noted between 80%-93% and local control ranged between 81%-88%. Mean rate of local failure was 12.3% (SD 3.6%, R: 8%-18%). Distant failure rate was reported between 2%-3% and metastasis free survival ranged between 82%-88%. Mean disease free survival and overall survival were 77.3% (SD 6.6%, R: 66%-100%) and 82.5% (SD 13.7%, R: 70%-87.7%). Acute toxicity was mostly grade 1/2 dermatitis, proctitis or cystitis; G3 or higher toxicity was reported only in 4 patients in 2 studies (dermatitis n = 3 and sphincter necrosis n = 1). Most common long term toxicities were incontinence (2.5%-9%) and proctitis (2.5%-19%); G3/4 toxicity ranged between 2.2%-7.1%. Mean sphincter preservation rate and colostomy free survival was 88.0% and 80.4%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Pooled analysis in this review suggests excellent response, local control and survival with HDRBT in combination with EBRT and CT, with limited toxicity. Prospective well conducted trials are needed to further establish role of HDRBT management of anal cancer with future focus on development of international consensus on patient selection, dosimetric parameters, treatment sequencing as well as defining uniform outcome and toxicity assessment.

Primary Bankart Repair Versus Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction in Patients with Subcritical Bone Loss: A Cost-Utility Analysis.

Anterior shoulder instability and its treatment is a quickly evolving field of interest in orthopaedics, both for patients and for health-care systems. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction (AAGR) compared with Bankart repair in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability in patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of Canada's publicly funded health-care system. A decision-tree model was created to simulate the progression of patients undergoing either a primary Bankart repair or AAGR. Recently published data were used to determine the recurrence rate and level of glenoid bone loss for the AAGR procedure; the recurrence rate was 1.4% in a cohort with a mean glenoid bone loss of 25.3%. A literature review on the primary Bankart procedure in patients with at least subcritical levels of glenoid bone loss yielded a recurrence rate of 22.9% in patients with a mean glenoid bone loss of 17.5%. AAGR served as the revision surgery for both primary procedures. Health utility scores for anterior shoulder instability were obtained from published literature. Total procedure costs, including costs of operating-room consumables, anesthesia, diagnostic imaging, and rehabilitation, were sourced from a hospital database. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 5,000 Monte Carlo simulations was performed, and results were used to create a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. RESULTS: The AAGR procedure was less costly and led to an improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) when compared with the arthroscopic Bankart repair in the treatment of patients with anterior shoulder instability with subcritical glenoid bone loss (AAGR, cost = $16,682.77 [Canadian dollars] and QALYs = 5.76; Bankart, cost = $16,720.29 and QALYs = 5.46), suggesting that the AAGR is dominant, i.e., lower costs with higher QALYs. Applying a commonly used willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained, the probability that the primary AAGR was more cost-effective was 85.8%. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that, from the perspective of a publicly funded health-care system, AAGR was the economical treatment option when compared with Bankart repair in anterior shoulder instability with subcritical glenoid bone loss. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Low rate of recurrent instability following the open Latarjet procedure as a revision procedure for failed prior stabilization surgery.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to ascertain functional outcomes, recurrence rates and subsequent revision rates following the open Latarjet procedure when performed as a revision procedure. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Studies where the Latarjet procedure was performed as a revision procedure were included. Clinical outcomes analyzed were: (1) functional outcomes, (2) recurrent instability, (3) revisions, and (4) complications. RESULTS: The review found 16 studies with 713 shoulders that met the inclusion criteria. 605 of the patients were male (84.9%), with an average age of 28.2 years (15-62) and follow-up of 47.7 months. The most commonly reported functional outcome measure was the Rowe score, with a weighted mean of 92.7. 86/95 patients had good-excellent outcomes (90.4%). 136/143 patients reported return to play (95.1%). 141/161 patients returned to the same level of competition (87.6%). 50 patients experienced recurrence (8.4%). Five patients experienced redislocation (0.9%) and 37 patients experienced subluxation (6.7%). There were 29 revisions (5.1%), with 12 revisions due to recurrence (2.1%). There were 68 total complications, not including recurrence (11%). The most common complications were 13 cases of nerve damage and infection respectively (2.1%). There was 17 cases of new instability arthropathy (6.5%), and 31 cases of residual pain (6.7%). CONCLUSION: This review shows that the revision Latarjet provides excellent functional outcomes, low rates of recurrence and complications, and a high rate of return to sport among athletes. This results from study can be used to explain the expected outcomes associated with the Latarjet procedure performed as a revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Return to Sport Following Arthroscopic Repair of 270° Labral Tears.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the rate of return to sport following arthroscopic repair of 270° labral tears. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with 270° labral tears treated arthroscopically between 2013 and 2017 by a single surgeon. Patients were followed-up to assess whether they were able to return to sport, the level to which they returned and the timing of return. Complications, the Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS), the Rowe score, the Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score, and the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV) were recorded. RESULTS: The study included 25 patients, with a mean follow-up of 42.2 ± 16.5 months. Of the 25 patients, 19 (76.0%) returned to sport at a mean of 6.8 ± 2.6 months, while 15 (60%) returned at the same or a higher level. At final follow-up, the mean Rowe score was 80.6 ± 14.2; the mean SIRSI score was 61.8 ± 25.4; the mean SSV was 86.4 ± 15.2; and the mean VAS score was 2.2 ± 2.0. One patient reported recurrent subluxation, but no patients suffered a recurrent dislocation during the study period. No revision surgeries were performed within the study period. CONCLUSION: Patients with 270° labral tears who were treated with arthroscopic repair showed an overall high rate of return to sport. Despite a low rate of recurring instability, not all patients were able to return to their previous levels of sports. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Long-term outcomes of the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability: a systematic review of studies at 10-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: This study systematically reviewed the evidence in the literature to ascertain the functional outcomes, recurrences rates, and subsequent revision rates after the open Latarjet procedure at a minimum of 10 years of follow-up. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, using the Embase, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Studies that reported a minimum of 10 years of clinical follow-up after the Latarjet procedure were included. RESULTS: Our review found 13 studies including 822 patients (845 shoulders) meeting our inclusion criteria. Patients (82% men) were an average age of 27.4 years, and mean follow-up was 199.2 months (16.6 years). The commonly used functional outcome score was the Rowe score with a weighted mean average of 88.5. The overall rate of return to play sports was 84.9%, with 76.3% returning to the same level of play. The rate of good/excellent outcomes was 86.1%. The recurrent instability rate was 8.5%, with 3.2% of patients having recurrent dislocations. The revision rate was 3.7%, with 1.6% of patients undergoing revisions due to recurrence. There were arthritic changes in 38.2% of patients and residual shoulder pain in 35.7%, with 4.8% experiencing daily pain. CONCLUSIONS: The Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability results in excellent functional outcomes at long-term and a high rate of return to sport among athletes. However, varying rates of recurrence, residual pain, and progression of instability arthropathy are still of concern.