The Influence of Obesity on Outcomes Following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 118,331 Patients Internationally.

Background: Given the rising prevalence of obesity, the number of patients with obesity undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) will likely increase; however, there have been mixed results in the existing literature with regard to the effect of elevated body mass index (BMI) on functional outcomes and complications. Methods: The patient-reported outcome measures included the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, range of motion, and adverse events. Results: Fourteen studies (118,331 patients) were included. There were significant decreases in VAS pain scores for both patients with obesity (mean difference, -3.8 [95% confidence interval (CI), -3.9 to -3.7]; p < 0.001) and patients without obesity (mean difference, -3.2 [95% CI, -3.3 to -3.1]; p < 0.001). There were also significant increases in ASES scores for both patients with obesity (mean difference, 24.3 [95% CI, 22.5 to 26.1]; p < 0.001) and patients without obesity (mean difference, 24.3 [95% CI, 21.4 to 26.0]; p < 0.001). There were also significant increases in ASES scores for both patients with obesity (mean difference, 24.3 [95% CI, 22.5 to 26.1]; p < 0.001) and patients without obesity (mean difference, 24.3 [95% CI, 21.4 to 26.0]; p < 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in final VAS pain scores, ASES scores, or range of motion between the groups. The mean rates of complications were higher among patients with obesity (1.2% ± 1.7%) than among patients without obesity (0.59% ± 0.11%) (p < 0.0001), and the mean rates of postoperative admissions were also higher among patients with obesity (5.9%) than patients without obesity (3.7%) (p < 0.0001). Although the mean rates of reoperation were similar between groups (5.2% ± 2.8% compared with 5.2% ± 4.2%), the meta-analysis revealed lower odds of reoperation in patients without obesity (odds ratio [OR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.71 to 0.82]). Conclusions: No significant or clinically important differences in postoperative pain, ASES scores, or range of motion were found between patients with and without obesity following arthroscopic RCR. However, populations with obesity had higher rates of complications, postoperative admissions, and reoperation following arthroscopic RCR. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The Perfect Circle Technique Shows Poor Inter-rater Reliability in Measuring Anterior Glenoid Bone Loss on Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Purpose: To evaluate the reliability of the perfect circle methodology for measurement of glenoid bone loss in patients with anterior glenohumeral instability. Methods: We performed a chart review of retrospectively collected patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic anterior labral repair between January 1 and June 30, 2021, using our institution's electronic medical records. The inclusion criteria included isolated anterior shoulder instability with anterior labral repair and corroborated tears on magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 9 raters, either sports or shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons, each evaluated the affected shoulder magnetic resonance imaging scans twice, with a minimum of 2 weeks between measurements. Measurements followed the "perfect circle" technique and included projected anterior-to-posterior glenoid diameter, amount of posterior bone loss, and percentage of posterior bone loss. Intrarater reliability and inter-rater reliability were then determined by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results: Ten consecutive patients meeting the selection criteria were chosen for inclusion in this analysis. Average estimated bone loss for the cohort was 2.45 mm, and the mean estimated glenoid diameter of the involved shoulder was 28.82 mm. The average percentage of bone loss measured 8.54%. The ICC for interobserver reliability was 0.55 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.17 for the anterior bone loss measurement (poorly to moderately reliable). The ICC for intraobserver reliability was 0.69 for the perfect circle diameter and 0.71 for anterior bone loss (moderately reliable). Conclusions: The perfect circle technique for estimating anterior glenoid bone loss on magnetic resonance imaging was found to have moderate intrarater reliability; however, reliability between observers was found to be moderate to poor. Level of Evidence: Level IV, diagnostic case series.

Outcomes of Concomitant Glenohumeral Stabilization After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair in Military Patients Younger Than 40 Years.

Background: While concomitant rotator cuff and inferior labral tears are relatively uncommon in young civilians, military populations represent a unique opportunity to study this injury pattern. Purpose: To (1) evaluate the long-term outcomes after combined arthroscopic rotator cuff and inferior labral repair in military patients <40 years and (2) compare functional outcomes with those after isolated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Military patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair between January 2011 and December 2016 and had a minimum of 5-year follow-up data were included in this study. The patients were categorized into those who had undergone combined arthroscopic rotator cuff and inferior labral repair (RCIL cohort) and those who had isolated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR cohort). Pre- and postoperative outcome measures-visual analog scale for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score, Rowe Instability Score, and range of motion-were compared between the groups. Results: A total of 50 shoulders (27 in the RCIL cohort and 23 in the ARCR cohort) were assessed. The RCIL and ARCR groups were similar in terms of age (mean, 33.19 years [range, 21-39 years] vs 35.39 years [range, 26-39 years], respectively) and sex (% male, 88.46% vs 82.61%, respectively). All patients were active-duty military at the time of surgery. The mean final follow-up was at 106.93 ± 16.66 months for the RCIL group and 105.70 ± 7.52 months for the ARCR group (P = .75). There were no differences in preoperative outcome scores between groups. Postoperatively, both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in all outcome scores (P < .0001 for all), and there were no significant group differences in any final postoperative outcome measures. At the final follow-up, 26 (96.30%) patients in the RCIL cohort and 20 (86.96%) in the ARCR cohort had returned to unrestricted active-duty military service (P = .3223). Conclusion: The study findings indicate that concomitant glenohumeral stabilization does not prevent worse outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in this military cohort. Combined repair produced statistically and clinically significant improvements in outcome scores at the long-term follow-up, indicating that simultaneous repair of combined lesions was an appropriate treatment option in this patient population.

Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State After Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair for Posterior Glenohumeral Instability.

BACKGROUND: Posterior glenohumeral instability is an increasingly recognized cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction among young, active populations. Outcomes after posterior stabilization procedures are commonly assessed using patient-reported outcome measures including the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), the Rowe instability score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. The clinical significance thresholds for these measures after arthroscopic posterior labral repair (aPLR), however, remain undefined. PURPOSE: We aimed to define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the SANE, Rowe score, and ASES score as well as the VAS pain after aPLR. Additionally, we sought to determine preoperative factors predictive of reaching, as well as failing to reach, clinical significance. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of patient-reported outcome scores collected from patients who underwent aPLR between January 2011 and December 2018. To determine the clinically significant threshold that corresponded to achieving a meaningful outcome, the MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated for the SANE, Rowe score, ASES score, and VAS pain utilizing either an anchor- or distribution-based method. Additionally, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the factors associated with achieving, or not achieving, the MCID, SCB, and PASS. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients with a mean follow-up of 82.55 ± 24.20 months were available for final analysis. MCID, SCB, and PASS values for the VAS pain were 1.10, 6, and 3, respectively; for the ASES score were 7.8, 34, and 80, respectively; for the SANE were 10.15, 33, and 85, respectively; and for the Rowe score were 11.3, 60, and 90, respectively. To meet the MCID, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.1639; P = .0293) was found to be a positive predictor for the VAS pain, and a lower preoperative SANE score (OR, 0.9939; P = .0003) was found to be a negative predictor for the SANE. Dominant arm involvement was associated with lower odds of achieving the PASS for the ASES score (OR, 0.7834; P = .0259) and VAS pain (OR, 0.7887; P = .0436). Patients who reported a history of shoulder trauma were more likely to reach the PASS for the SANE (OR, 1.3501; P = .0089), Rowe score (OR, 1.3938; P = .0052), and VAS pain (OR, 1.3507; P = .0104) as well as the SCB for the ASES score (OR, 1.2642; P = .0469) and SANE (OR, 1.2554; P = .0444). A higher preoperative VAS pain score was associated with higher odds of achieving the SCB for both the VAS pain (OR, 1.1653; P = .0110) and Rowe score (OR, 1.1282; P = .0175). Lastly, concomitant biceps tenodesis was associated with greater odds of achieving the SCB for the ASES score (OR, 1.3490; P = .0130) and reaching the PASS for the SANE (OR, 1.3825; P = .0038) and Rowe score (OR, 1.4040; P = .0035). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study is the first to define the MCID, SCB, and PASS for the ASES score, Rowe score, SANE, and VAS pain in patients undergoing aPLR. Furthermore, we found that patients who reported a history of shoulder trauma and those who underwent concomitant biceps tenodesis demonstrated a greater likelihood of achieving clinical significance. Dominant arm involvement was associated with lower odds of achieving clinical significance.

Subacromial Balloon Placement Demonstrates No Advantage Over Debridement in the Treatment of Massive Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Dual-Armed Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Over 1000 Patients.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, the placement of a subacromial balloon (SAB) spacer has emerged as a treatment option for massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCTs); however, there is significant controversy regarding its utility in comparison with other surgical interventions. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes after SAB spacer placement versus arthroscopic debridement for MIRCTs. STUDY DESIGN: Dual-armed systematic review and meta-analysis (level IV evidence). METHODS: A literature search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and CINAHL Complete databases for articles published before May 7, 2022, was conducted to identify patients with MIRCTs undergoing the 2 procedures. For the SAB arm, 14 of 449 studies were considered eligible for inclusion, while 14 of 272 studies were considered eligible for inclusion in the debridement arm. RESULTS: In total, 528 patients were eligible for inclusion in the SAB arm and 479 patients in the debridement arm, and 69.9% of patients undergoing SAB placement also underwent concomitant debridement. Decreases in the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score and increases in the Constant score were found to be significantly larger after debridement (-0.7 points [P < .001] and +5.5 points [P < .001], respectively), although the Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the VAS was not achieved after either procedure. Both SAB placement and debridement significantly improved range of motion in forward flexion/forward elevation, internal and external rotation, and abduction (P < .001). Rates of general complication were higher after debridement versus SAB placement (5.2% ± 5.6% vs 3.5% ± 6.3%, respectively; P < .001); however, there were no significant differences between SAB placement and debridement in rates of persistent symptoms requiring a reintervention (3.3% ± 6.2% vs 3.8% ± 7.3%, respectively; P = .252) or reoperation rates (5.1% ± 7.6% vs 4.8% ± 8.4%, respectively; P = .552). The mean time to conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty was 11.0 versus 25.4 months, respectively, for the SAB versus debridement arm. CONCLUSION: While SAB placement was associated with acceptable postoperative outcomes in the treatment of MIRCTs, there was no clear benefit over debridement alone. Shorter operative times coupled with better postoperative outcomes and longer times to conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty rendered debridement a more attractive option. While there may be a role for SAB placement in poor surgical candidates, there is burgeoning evidence to support debridement alone without SAB placement for the treatment of MIRCTs.

Concomitant Biceps Tenodesis Does Not Portend Inferior Outcomes After Anterior Glenohumeral Stabilization.

BACKGROUND: Military patients are known to suffer disproportionately high rates of glenohumeral instability as well as superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears. Additionally, a concomitant SLAP tear is frequently observed in patients with anterior shoulder instability. Even though biceps tenodesis has been demonstrated to produce superior outcomes to SLAP repair in military patients with isolated SLAP lesions, no existing studies have reported on outcomes after simultaneous tenodesis and anterior labral repair in patients with co-existing abnormalities. PURPOSE: To evaluate outcomes after simultaneous arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair in military patients younger than 40 years. We also sought to compare these outcomes with those after repair of an isolated anterior labral tear. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: This study is a retrospective analysis of all military patients younger than 40 years from a single base who underwent arthroscopic anterior glenohumeral stabilization with or without concomitant biceps tenodesis between January 2010 and December 2019. Patients with glenoid bone loss of >13.5% were not eligible for inclusion. Outcome measures including the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, the Rowe instability score, and range of motion were administered preoperatively and postoperatively, and scores were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 82 patients met inclusion criteria for the study. All patients were active-duty service members at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up was 87.75 ± 27.05 months in the repair + tenodesis group and 94.07 ± 28.72 months in the isolated repair group (P = .3085). Patients who underwent repair + tenodesis had significantly worse preoperative VAS pain (6.85 ± 1.86 vs 5.02 ± 2.07, respectively; P < .001), ASES (51.78 ± 11.89 vs 62.43 ± 12.35, respectively; P = .0002), and Rowe (26.75 ± 7.81 vs 37.26 ± 14.91, respectively; P = .0002) scores than patients who underwent isolated repair. Both groups experienced significant improvements in outcome scores postoperatively (P < .0001 for all), and there were no statistically significant differences in postoperative outcome scores or range of motion between groups. There were no differences in the percentage of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state for the VAS pain, SANE, ASES, and Rowe scores between groups. Overall, 37 of the 40 (92.50%) patients in the repair + tenodesis group and 40 of the 42 (95.24%) patients in the isolated repair group returned to unrestricted active-duty military service (P = .6045). In addition, 38 (95.00%) patients in the repair + tenodesis group and 40 (95.24%) patients in the isolated repair group returned to preinjury levels of sporting activity (P = .9600). There were no significant differences in the number of failures, revision surgical procedures, or patients discharged from the military between groups (P = .9421, P = .9400, and P = .6045, respectively). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicate that simultaneous biceps tenodesis and labral repair was a viable treatment option for the management of concomitant SLAP and anterior labral lesions in young, active military patients younger than 40 years.

Acromial Morphology Does Not Correlate with Age at Time of Rotator Cuff Tear: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine if scapular anatomy differs between younger and older patients with atraumatic full-thickness supraspinatus tears. Methods: The critical shoulder angle, acromial index and lateral acromial angle were measured on standardized radiographs of two groups of patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of full-thickness degenerative supraspinatus tears. Group 1 included 61 patients under the age of 50 years while Group 2 included 45 patients over the age of 70 years. The mean critical shoulder angle, acromial index, and lateral acromial angle were then compared. Results: There was no significant difference between groups for the critical shoulder angle (p = .433), acromial index (p = .881) or lateral acromial angle (p = .263). Interobserver reliability for critical shoulder angle, acromial index, and lateral acromial angle was nearly perfect (interclass correlation coefficient 0.996, 0.996, 0.998, respectively). No significant correlation existed between age and critical shoulder angle (p = .309), acromial index (p = .484) or lateral acromial angle (p = .685). Discussion: While the critical shoulder angle and acromial index were found to be high and in the typical range for patients with rotator cuff tears in both groups, there were no significant differences in acromial morphology between Groups 1 and 2.

Simultaneous Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair and Glenoid Microfracture in Active-Duty Military Patients Younger Than 50 Years: Outcomes at Midterm Follow-up.

Background: While concomitant full-thickness rotator cuff tears and glenoid osteochondral defects are relatively uncommon in younger patients, military patients represent a unique opportunity to study this challenging injury pattern. Purpose/Hypothesis: To compare the outcomes of young, active-duty military patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) with those who underwent ARCR plus concurrent glenoid microfracture (ARCR+Mfx). It was hypothesized that ARCR+Mfx would produce significant improvements in patient-reported outcome measures. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of consecutive active-duty military patients from a single base who underwent ARCR for full-thickness rotator cuff tears between January 2012 and December 2020. All patients were <50 years and had minimum 2-year follow-up data. Patients who underwent ARCR+Mfx were compared with those who underwent isolated ARCR based on the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, and range of motion. Results: A total of 88 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study: 28 underwent ARCR+Mfx and 60 underwent isolated ARCR. The mean final follow-up was 74.11 ± 33.57 months for the ARCR+Mfx group and 72.87 ± 11.46 months for the ARCR group (P = .80). There were no differences in baseline patient characteristics or preoperative outcome scores between groups. Postoperatively, both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in all outcome scores (P < .0001 for all). However, the ARCR+Mfx group had significantly worse VAS pain (1.89 ± 2.22 vs 1.03 ± 1.70; P = .05), SANE (85.46 ± 12.99 vs 91.93 ± 12.26; P = .03), and ASES (86.25 ± 14.14 vs 92.85 ± 12.57; P = .03) scores. At the final follow-up, 20 (71.43%) patients in the ARCR+Mfx group and 53 (88.33%) patients in the ARCR group were able to remain on unrestricted active-duty military service (P = .05). Conclusion: Concomitant ARCR+Mfx led to statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcome measures at the midterm follow-up. However, patients who underwent ARCR+Mfx had significantly worse outcomes and were less likely to return to active-duty military service than those who underwent isolated ARCR. The study findings suggest that ARCR+Mfx may be a reasonable option for young, active patients who are not candidates for arthroplasty.

Risk Factors for Glenoid Bone Loss in the Setting of Posterior Glenohumeral Instability.

Background: Posterior instability has been reported to account for up to 24% of cases of shoulder instability in certain active populations. However, there is a paucity of data available regarding the risk factors associated with posterior glenoid bone loss. Purpose: To characterize the epidemiology of, and risk factors associated with, glenoid bone loss within a cohort of patients who underwent primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization for isolated posterior-type glenohumeral instability. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization for posterior-type instability between January 2011 and December 2019. Preoperative magnetic resonance arthrograms were used to calculate posterior glenoid bone loss using a perfect circle technique. Patient characteristics and revision rates were obtained. Bone loss (both in millimeters and as a percentage) was compared between patients based on sex, age, arm dominance, sports participation, time to surgery, glenoid version, history of trauma, and number of anchors used for labral repair. Results: Included were 112 patients with a mean age of 28.66 ± 10.07 years; 91 patients (81.25%) were found to have measurable bone loss. The mean bone loss was 2.46 ± 1.68 mm (8.98% ± 6.12%). Significantly greater bone loss was found in athletes versus nonathletes (10.09% ± 6.86 vs 7.44% ± 4.56; P = .0232), female versus male patients (11.17% ± 6.53 vs 8.17% ± 5.80; P = .0212), and patients dominant arm involvement versus nondominant arm involvement (10.26% ± 5.63 vs 7.07% ± 6.38; P = .0064). Multivariate regression analysis identified dominant arm involvement as an independent risk factor for bone loss (P = .0033), and dominant arm involvement (P = .0024) and athlete status (P = .0133) as risk factors for bone loss >13.5%. At the conclusion of the study period, 7 patients had experienced recurrent instability (6.25%). Conclusion: The findings of this study are in alignment with existing data suggesting that posterior glenoid bone loss is highly prevalent in patients undergoing primary arthroscopic stabilization for posterior-type shoulder instability. Our results suggest that patients with dominant arm involvement are at risk for greater posterior glenoid bone loss. Athlete status and dominant arm involvement were identified as independent risk factors for bone loss >13.5%.

Epidemiology of shoulder dislocations presenting to United States emergency departments: An updated ten-year study.

BACKGROUND: Glenohumeral dislocation is a common injury that may predispose patients to chronic pain and instability. However, there is a paucity of current data available regarding the epidemiological trends of this injury. AIM: To provide an updated, comparative assessment of the epidemiology of shoulder dislocations presenting to emergency departments in the United States. We also sought to analyze patient demographic risk factors and consumer products associated with dislocation events. METHODS: Data were obtained from the national electronic injury surveillance system database for glenohumeral dislocations between 2012 and 2021. Incidence, age, sex, and injury characteristics were analyzed using weighted population statistics as well as incidence rates and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: In total, an estimated 773039 shoulder dislocations (CI: 640598-905481) presented to emergency rooms across the United States during the study period. The annual incidence rate was 23.96 per 100000 persons and the average patient age at the time of injury was 37.1 years. Significantly more male patients sustained dislocations than female patients (537189, 69.5%, vs 235834, 30.5%, P < 0.001). With regard to associated consumer products, sports and recreation equipment were involved in the highest proportion of incidents (44.31%), followed by home structures and construction materials (21.22%), and home furnishings, fixtures, and accessories (21.21%). Regarding product sub-groups, stairs, ramps, landings, floors was cited in the greatest number of cases (131745). CONCLUSION: The national annual incidence rate of glenohumeral dislocations throughout the study period was approximately 23.92 per 100000 persons. Male adolescents sustained the highest proportion of dislocations, with a peak incidence in age group 15-20 years, predominantly secondary to participation in sporting and recreational activities. Conversely, women experienced a relatively consistent incidence of dislocation throughout their lifespan. After age 63, the incidence rate of dislocations in females was found to surpass that observed in males.

Diagnosis of Posterior and Combined-Type Shoulder Instability: A 10-Year Cross-sectional Study From a Single Military Base.

Background: Large variations exist in the reported frequency and etiology of posterior and combined shoulder instability in the active-duty military population. Purpose: To compare imaging and clinical examination findings as well as reoperation rates between active-duty military patients who underwent surgery for anterior, posterior, and combined-type shoulder instability. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on patients treated surgically for shoulder instability from a single military base from January 2010 to December 2019. Each case was characterized as isolated anterior, isolated posterior, or combined, according to arthroscopic findings. Information was collected on patient characteristics, history of trauma, time to surgery, associated pathological findings, and survivorship at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Results: Overall, 416 patients (n = 394 men; n = 22 women), with a mean age of 29.1 years, underwent primary shoulder stabilization surgery during the study period. There were 158 patients (38%) with isolated anterior instability, 139 (33%) with isolated posterior instability, and 119 (29%) with combined instability. A history of trauma was more prevalent with isolated anterior instability (129 [81.7%]) than with either isolated posterior (95 [68.4%]) or combined instability (73 [61.3%]) (P = .047 and P = .001, respectively). Patients with anterior instability were significantly more likely to be diagnosed on the preoperative physical examination when compared with patients with posterior instability (93% vs 79.1%; P < .001) or combined instability (93% vs 75.6%; P < .001) and were also more likely to have a discrete labral tear detected on a preoperative magnetic resonance arthrogram than patients with posterior instability (82.9% vs 63.3%; P < .001). There was no significant difference in the rate of medical discharge or recurrent instability requiring reoperation between groups. Conclusion: The study findings indicated that young, active-duty military patients are at increased risk for isolated posterior and combined-type shoulder instability, with posterior and combined instability collectively accounting for over 60% of instability cases in this cohort. Orthopaedic surgeons should be aware of instability when evaluating and treating young, active-duty military patients with shoulder pain, even in the absence of diagnostic physical examinations or imaging findings.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Glenoid Bone Loss in Combined Shoulder Instability in Young, Active-Duty Military Patients.

Background: US military servicemembers experience higher rates of posterior and combined-type instability as compared with their nonmilitary peers. Purpose: (1) To determine the prevalence of glenoid bone loss (GBL) in young, active-duty military patients with combined-type shoulder instability who underwent operative shoulder stabilization; (2) to evaluate whether GBL is associated with differences in postoperative outcomes; and (3) to identify factors associated with larger defects. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This study included active-duty military patients who underwent primary surgical shoulder stabilization for combined anterior and posterior capsulolabral tears between January 2012 and December 2018. Preoperative magnetic resonance arthrograms were used to calculate anterior, posterior, and total GBL using the "perfect circle" technique. We recorded patient characteristics, revisions, complications, return to duty, range of motion, and scores on multiple outcome measures (visual analog scale for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Rowe). GBL prevalence was compared by time to surgery, glenoid version, history of trauma, and number of anchors used for labral repair. Outcome scores, return to active duty, and revision procedures were compared by degree of anterior or posterior GBL: <13.5% (mild) versus ≥13.5% (subcritical). Results: GBL was noted in 28 (77.8%) of the 36 patients. Nineteen (52.8%) patients had anterior GBL, 18 (50.0%) had posterior, and 9 (25.0%) had combined. Four (11.1%) patients had subcritical anterior or posterior GBL. Increased posterior GBL was associated with history of trauma (P = .041), time to surgery >12 months (P = .024), and glenoid retroversion ≥9° (P = .010); increased total GBL was associated with longer time to surgery (P = .023) and labral repair requiring >4 anchors (P = .012); and increased anterior GBL was associated with labral repair requiring >4 anchors (P = .011). There were statistically significant improvements on all outcome measures, with no changes in range of motion postoperatively. No significant difference on any outcome score was observed between patients with mild and subcritical GBL. Conclusion: In our analysis, 78% of patients had appreciable GBL, suggesting that GBL is highly prevalent in this patient population. Longer time to surgery, traumatic cause, significant glenoid retroversion, and large labral tears were identified as risk factors for increased GBL.

Comparison of Volleyball-Related Injuries at US Emergency Departments Between High School and Collegiate Athletes: A 10-Year NEISS Database Study.

Background: There is a paucity of current data regarding the sport-specific injury patterns and epidemiological trends associated with volleyball. Purpose: To provide an updated, comparative assessment of the epidemiology of volleyball-related injuries among female high school- and college-aged athletes and to characterize the burden of these injuries on emergency departments (EDs) across the United States. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiological study. Methods: Data were obtained from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System for volleyball-related injuries between 2012 and 2021 in high school-aged (14-18 years) and college-aged (19-23 years) patients. Incidence, injury characteristics, incident locales, and dispositions were analyzed with weighted population statistics based on National Federation of State High School Associations and National Collegiate Athletic Association data as well as incidence rates and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% CIs. Results: In total, an estimated 214,302 female athletes aged 14 to 23 years were evaluated in EDs across the United States with volleyball-related injuries between 2012 and 2021. Female college-aged athletes were nearly 3 times more likely to be evaluated with these injuries than their high school-aged counterparts, with incidence rates of 12.8 per 100 at-risk individuals among college-aged athletes and 4.3 per 100 at-risk individuals in high school-aged athletes (IRR, 0.338; 95% CI, 0.333-0.342). The ankle, head, and knee were most frequently injured, often involving strains/sprains, contusions, fractures, and concussions. The IRRs of nearly all injuries were higher among collegiate athletes, especially among knee (IRR, 4.56; 95% CI, 4.40-4.72) and shoulder (IRR, 5.07; 95% CI, 4.81-5.35) injuries. Conclusion: Among volleyball-related injuries evaluated in EDs between 2012 and 2021, the incidence rates of injuries in college-aged athletes far surpassed those of their high school-aged peers irrespective of injury type or bodily location. While sprains and strains were the most frequent injuries, head injuries accounted for the second most common diagnosis in both groups, suggesting that clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion for concussion when evaluating players.

Outcomes Following Combined Posterior Labral and SLAP Repair in Military Patients Younger Than 35 Years.

BACKGROUND: Members of the military are known to experience disproportionately high rates of both glenohumeral instability and superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) tears when compared with civilian populations. Although the outcomes after simultaneous repair of Bankart and SLAP lesions have been well described, there is a paucity of literature available regarding the operative management of posterior instability with concomitant superior labral pathology. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of combined arthroscopic posterior labral and SLAP repair with those of isolated posterior labral repair. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All consecutive patients younger than 35 years who underwent arthroscopic posterior labral repair from January 2011 to December 2016 with a minimum follow-up of 5 years were identified. From this cohort of eligible patients, all individuals who had undergone combined SLAP and posterior labral repair (SLAP cohort) versus posterior labral repair alone (instability cohort) were then identified. Outcome measures including the visual analog scale score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Rowe instability score, and range of motion were collected pre- and postoperatively and scores were compared between groups. RESULTS: In total, 83 patients met the inclusion criteria for the study. All patients were active-duty military at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up was 93.79 ± 18.06 months in the instability group and 91.24 ± 18.02 months in the SLAP group (P = .5228). Preoperative SANE and ASES scores were significantly worse in the SLAP group. Both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in outcome scores postoperatively (P < .0001 for all), and there were no significant differences in any outcome scores or range of motion between groups. In total, 39 patients in the instability cohort and 37 in the SLAP cohort returned to preinjury levels of work (92.86% vs 90.24%, respectively; P = .7126), and 38 instability patients and 35 SLAP patients returned to preinjury levels of sporting activity (90.48% vs 85.37%, respectively; P = .5195). Two patients in the instability group and 4 patients in the SLAP group were medically discharged from the military (4.76% vs 9.76%; P = .4326), and 2 patients in each cohort had experienced treatment failure at the final follow-up (4.76% vs 4.88%; P > .9999). CONCLUSION: Combined posterior labral and SLAP repair led to statistically and clinically significant increases in outcome scores and high rates of return to active-duty military service that did not differ significantly from the results after isolated posterior labral repair. The results of this study indicate that simultaneous repair is a viable treatment option for the management of combined lesions in active-duty military patients <35 years of age.

Incidence of sports-related sternoclavicular joint dislocations in the United States over the last two decades.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological understanding of acute sternoclavicular (SC) dislocations secondary to sports across the United States is poorly defined. AIM: To identify and assess epidemiological trends of SC dislocations occurring secondary to sports-related mechanisms across United States over the past two decades. METHODS: This cross-sectional, descriptive epidemiological study evaluates epidemiological trends of SC dislocations from sports that present to emergency departments (EDs) across the United States. Data were obtained from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System database spanning two decades. Data on incidence, patient demographics, mechanisms of injury, dislocation types, incident locales, and patient dispositions were collected. RESULTS: 1622 SC dislocations occurred nationwide from 2001 to 2020 [incidence = 0.262/1000000 people, confidence interval (CI) = 0.250-0.275], comprising 0.1% of shoulder/upper trunk dislocations. Most patients were male (91%, n = 1480) and aged 5-17 (61%, n = 982). Football, wrestling, and biking were the most frequently implicated sports, with contact sports responsible for 59% of athletic injuries (n = 961). Recreational vehicle-related sports injuries, such as all-terrain vehicles, dirt bikes, and mopeds accounted for 7.8% of all injuries (n = 126), with dirt bikes specifically comprising 3.7% (n = 61). Ultimately, 82% were discharged from the ED (n = 1337), 12% were admitted (n = 194), and 6% were transferred (n = 90). All recorded posterior dislocations were admitted or transferred from the ED. Patients sustaining SC dislocations from contact sports had a significantly increased risk of hospital admission or transfer rather than discharge from the ED as compared to patients whose injuries were from non-contact sports (incidence rate ratio = 1.46, CI: = 1.32-1.61, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: SC dislocations from sports continue to be rare with a stably low incidence over the past two decades, likely comprising a smaller proportion of shoulder dislocations than previously thought. Contact sports are a frequent source of injury, especially among school-aged and teenage males. Most patients are discharged directly from the ED; however, a substantial number are hospitalized, many of which had documented posterior dislocations. Ultimately, understanding the epidemiology and mechanism-related trends of acute SC dislocations is important given the potential severity of these injuries, concentration in a specific population, and uncertainty linked to rare presentation.

Midterm Outcomes Following Combined Biceps Tenodesis and Anterior Labral Repair in Active Duty Military Patients Younger Than 35 Years.

BACKGROUND: Superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) lesions and anterior instability are common causes of shoulder pain and dysfunction among active-duty members of the United States military. However, little data have been published regarding the surgical management of type V SLAP lesions. PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair with those of arthroscopic SLAP repair (defined as contiguous repair spanning from the superior labrum to the anteroinferior labrum) for type V SLAP tears in active-duty military patients younger than 35 years. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All consecutive patients from January 2010 to December 2015 who underwent arthroscopic SLAP repair or combined biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair for a type V SLAP lesion with a minimum 5-year follow-up were identified. The decision to perform type V SLAP repair versus combined biceps tenodesis and anterior labral repair was based on the condition of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT). Labral repair was performed in patients who had a type V SLAP tear with an otherwise clinically and anatomically healthy LHBT. Combined tenodesis and repair was performed in patients with evidence of LHBT abnormalities. Outcomes including the visual analog scale (VAS) score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, the Rowe instability score, and range of motion were collected preoperatively and postoperatively, and scores were compared between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients met the inclusion criteria for the study. All patients were active-duty service members at the time of surgery. A total of 44 patients underwent arthroscopic type V SLAP repair, and 40 patients underwent anterior labral repair with biceps tenodesis. The mean follow-up was 102.59 ± 20.98 months in the repair group and 94.50 ± 27.11 months in the tenodesis group (P = .1281). There were no significant differences in preoperative range of motion or outcome scores between the groups. Both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in outcome scores postoperatively (P < .0001 for all); however, compared with the repair group, the tenodesis group reported significantly better postoperative VAS (2.52 ± 2.36 vs 1.50 ± 1.91, respectively; P = .0328), SANE (86.82 ± 11.00 vs 93.43 ± 8.81, respectively; P = .0034), and ASES (83.32 ± 15.31 vs 89.90 ± 13.31, respectively; P = .0394) scores. There were no differences in the percentage of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state for the SANE and ASES between the groups. Overall, 34 patients in each group returned to preinjury levels of work (77.3% vs 85.0%, respectively; P = .3677), and 32 patients (72.7%) in the repair group and 33 patients (82.5%) in the tenodesis group returned to preinjury levels of sporting activity (P = .2850). There were no significant differences in the number of failures, revision surgical procedures, or patients discharged from the military between the groups (P = .0923, P = .1602, and P = .2919, respectively). CONCLUSION: Both arthroscopic-assisted subpectoral biceps tenodesis combined with anterior labral repair and arthroscopic SLAP repair led to statistically and clinically significant increases in outcome scores, marked improvements in pain, and high rates of return to unrestricted active duty in military patients with type V SLAP lesions. The results of this study suggest that biceps tenodesis combined with anterior labral repair produces comparable outcomes to arthroscopic type V SLAP repair in active-duty military patients younger than 35 years.

Simultaneous Arthroscopic Glenohumeral Stabilization and Glenoid Microfracture in Young, Active-Duty Military Patients: Outcomes at 5-Year Follow-up.

Background: Glenohumeral instability represents a common cause of shoulder pain and disability among active-duty members of the military and is associated with the development of glenoid osteochondral defects. Purpose: To report clinical outcomes and survivorship after combined microfracture of isolated chondral lesions of the glenoid and labral repair among young, active-duty military patients and to compare outcomes with those of patients who underwent isolated shoulder stabilization. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Included were 31 active-duty military patients aged <40 years who underwent simultaneous microfracture of chondral lesions of the glenoid and labral repair for shoulder instability between January 2011 and January 2017 (microfracture group) and 209 patients without chondral defects who underwent shoulder stabilization during the same time period (instability group). Preoperative and 5-year postoperative outcomes (range of motion [ROM], visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE] score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] shoulder score, and Rowe instability score) were compared within and between groups, and separate subgroup analyses were performed to determine whether variant of instability and dominant-shoulder involvement were associated with worse outcomes. Results: The mean follow-up was significantly longer for the microfracture group versus the instability group (95.58 ± 23.12 vs 83.38 ± 25.93 months; P = .014). Age and sex distributions were similar between groups. In both groups, there was significant pre- to postoperative improvement on all outcomes scores (P = .0001 for all). When compared with the instability cohort, microfracture patients had significantly worse postoperative VAS pain (2.65 ± 1.78 vs 1.55 ± 1.92; P = .003), SANE (79.13 ± 14.43 vs 91.23 ± 13.20; P < .0001), and ASES (79.90 ± 13.87 vs 89.03 ± 14.28; P = .001) scores, as well as decreased ROM in forward flexion (151.29° ± 11.76° vs 155.48° ± 10.3°; P = .039) and external rotation (63.65° ± 8.34° vs 65.17° ± 0.64°; P = .010). At latest follow-up, 58% of microfracture patients had returned to active-duty military service compared with 93.78% of isolated instability patients (P < .0001). Conclusion: Combined microfracture and arthroscopic labral repair produced modest, albeit statistically significant, improvements in patient-reported outcome measures and may be a reasonable treatment option for patients with chondral lesions who are not candidates for arthroplasty. However, microfracture patients had significantly worse outcomes than patients who underwent stabilization without concomitant chondral defects.

The Effect of the Overweight Condition on Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Outcomes.

This study sought to investigate the influence of a preexisting overweight condition (body mass index [BMI], 25-29.9 kg/m2) on functional outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery. A retrospective review was performed examining the outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in a normal-weight (BMI, 18.5-24.9 kg/m2) and an overweight (BMI, 25-29.9 kg/m2) population. Functional outcomes were assessed to include the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, and the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, as well as range of motion in forward flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation. A total of 52 normal-weight patients (mean BMI, 23.7±2.1 kg/m2) and 57 overweight patients (mean BMI, 28.4±1.4 kg/m2) were included. Both groups demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvements in VAS score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, and ASES score at final follow-up (P<.0001), with no difference in range of motion (P>.05). Overall, when comparing outcomes between the groups, there were significantly better outcomes in the normal-weight group's VAS scores (mean, 0.56±0.96 vs 1.3±1.7; P=.0064), ASES scores (mean, 96.1±5.8 vs 92.4±9.7; P=.0187), and internal rotation (mean thoracic vertebrae, 9.2±3.0 vs 10.4±2.6; P=.0289). However, these differences did not reach clinical significance regarding the threshold of patients meeting standard minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient-acceptable symptomatic state for rotator cuff repairs. Over-weight patients have improved outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery with noninferior clinical results when compared with normal-weight patients. More data regarding outcomes of overweight patients will help physicians make better-informed decisions when considering rotator cuff repair. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(4):242-249.].

Primary Arthroscopic Labral Management: Labral Repair and Complete Labral Reconstruction Both Offer Durable, Promising Results at Minimum 5-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Increased understanding of the acetabular labrum's role in hip joint biomechanics has led to a greater focus on the conservation and restoration of normal labral anatomic characteristics; however, labral repair is often not possible in the setting of severe intrasubstance damage or deficiency. PURPOSE: To compare 5-year postoperative patient-reported outcomes between hips treated with primary complete arthroscopic labral reconstruction and those treated with primary labral repair. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All hips that underwent primary labral repair or reconstruction by the senior surgeon between January 2015 and December 2015 were included. Hips that had undergone a previous intra-articular procedure were excluded. Visual analog scales and patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments were completed by patients within 1 week before surgery as a baseline measurement, between 22 and 26 months postoperatively for 2-year outcomes, and between 58 and 62 months for 5-year outcomes. PRO scores collected included the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the 12-Item International Hip Outcome Tool, and the visual analog scale for pain and satisfaction. Pain and satisfaction were assessed using visual analog scales. RESULTS: A total of 68 primary labral repairs and 62 primary complete labral reconstructions were included in the final analysis. Patients in the reconstruction cohort were older (38.3 vs 29.9 years; P < .001), had a higher incidence of severe labral tearing (62.90% vs 5.88%; P < .001), required a greater number of concomitant procedures (P < .001), and were more likely to have Beck grade III or IV chondral damage (12.94% vs 1.47%; P < .001). Both groups demonstrated statistically significant increases in outcome scores at minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients who underwent labral reconstruction had a significantly greater increase in mHHS from the preoperative assessment to latest follow-up compared with patients undergoing labral repair (27.43 vs 17.13; P = .04). No statistically significant differences between the 2 cohorts were found in achievement of minimal clinically important difference, Patient Acceptable Symptom State, maximum outcome improvement, and substantial clinical benefit at latest follow-up (P > .05). In total, 2 patients in the repair cohort and 3 patients in the reconstruction cohort required revision arthroscopy (P = .574). Further, 1 patient from each group converted to arthroplasty (P = .947). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that primary complete labral reconstruction is a viable surgical option for hips with moderate to severe labral pathology. At minimum 5-year follow-up, labral reconstruction produced similar outcomes to labral repair despite less favorable preoperative patient characteristics in the reconstruction cohort.