ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Arthrofibrosis is a fibrotic joint disorder resulting in restricted joint motion and pain. Risk factors associated with the development of postoperative arthrofibrosis include female sex, type of graft, and quicker time to reconstruction. These patients have typically benefitted from manipulation under anesthesia or arthroscopic lysis of adhesions. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively review the rate of arthrofibrosis in children and adolescents who previously underwent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective chart review examining patients 18 years or younger who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2013 and 2023. Data collected included age, body mass index, reconstruction technique, concomitant meniscal or ligamentous pathology, and need for revision surgery for arthroscopic lysis of adhesions vs manipulation under anesthesia. RESULTS: A total of 461 patients 18 years or younger who underwent ACL reconstruction were included in this study. Eighteen (3.90%) patients required reoperation for the development of arthrofibrosis. Skeletally immature patients were found to have a statistically significant lower rate of arthrofibrosis compared with skeletally mature patients (0% vs 4.80%; P=.0184). Patients with a higher weight and body mass index had an increased rate of arthrofibrosis (P=.0485 and P=.0410, respectively). Graft type did not have a significant impact on arthrofibrosis rates. There were no significant findings in terms of concomitant injuries and rate of arthrofibrosis. CONCLUSION: Arthrofibrosis developed in 3.90% of patients after ACL reconstruction. Skeletal immaturity may be protective against the development of arthrofibrosis. No association was found between graft type or concomitant knee pathology and arthrofibrosis. [Orthopedics. 202x;4x(x):xx-xx.].
ABSTRACT
Background: Accurate measurement of glenoid bone loss (GBL) is critical to preoperative planning in cases of recurrent shoulder instability. The concept of critical bone loss has been established with a value of GBL >13.5% being associated with higher failure rate following arthroscopic Bankart Repair. Advanced imaging, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, can be used to quantify GBL prior to surgery using the best-fit circle technique. Surgeons have traditionally relied on visual inspection of the MRI scan preoperatively or on visual inspection of the glenoid at the time of arthroscopy to determine whether GBL is present. The purpose of this study is to determine if 3 fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons could adequately quantify GBL without using best-fit circle measurements on MRI. Methods: A retrospective review was performed which included 122 patients over an 8-year period that had an arthroscopic Bankart repair performed by 3 fellowship-trained surgeons. In all patients, preoperative MRI scans were retrospectively measured using best-fit circle technique to determine true GBL and compare that to the surgeons' preoperative and intraoperative estimation of GBL. Results: GBL was correctly identified in only 36% (18/50) of patients when the preoperative best-fit circle measurements were not made. Critical bone loss was missed in 9.8% (12/122) of patients in the study group. The estimated mean bone loss in that group by visual inspection was 11.3% compared to 16% true bone loss measured on MRI. Even in the 18 patients with some identified bone loss prior to surgery, critical bone loss was missed in 6 patients when using visual inspection of the MRI or intraoperative inspection alone. Conclusion: Simple visual inspection of glenoid images on MRI scan and visual inspection of the glenoid at the time of surgery are inaccurate in determining the true extent of GBL especially in cases of subtle bone deficiency. Preoperative planning is dependent on the exact degree of bone deficiency and measurement on the MRI scan using the best-fit circle technique is recommended in all cases of instability surgery.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Maintenance of Certification (MOC) is a controversial topic in medicine for many different reasons. Studies have suggested that there may be associations between fewer negative outcomes and participation in MOC. However, MOC still remains controversial because of its cost. We sought to determine the estimated cost of MOC to the average orthopaedic surgeon, including fees and time cost, defined as the market value of the physician's time. METHODS: We calculated the total cost of MOC to be the sum of the fees required for applications, examinations, and other miscellaneous fees as well as the time cost to the physician and staff. Costs were calculated for the oral, written, and American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Web-based Longitudinal Assessment (ABOS WLA) MOC pathways based on the responses of 33 orthopaedic surgeons to a survey sent to a state orthopaedic society. RESULTS: We calculated the average orthopaedic surgeon's total cost in time and fees over the decade-long period to be $71,440.61 ($7,144.06 per year) for the oral examination MOC pathway and $80,391.55 ($8,039.16 per year) for the written examination pathway. We calculated the cost of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery web-based examination pathway to be $69,721.04 ($6,972.10 per year). CONCLUSIONS: The actual cost of MOC is much higher than just the fees paid to organizations providing services. The majority of the cost comes in the form of time cost to the physician. The ABOS WLA was implemented to alleviate the anxiety of a high-stakes examination and to encourage efficient longitudinal learning. We found that the ABOS WLA pathway does save time and money when compared with the written examination pathway when review courses and study periods are taken. We believe that future policy changes should focus on decreasing physician time spent completing MOC requirements, and decreasing the cost of these requirements, while preserving the model of continued evidence-based medical education.
