Pain After Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Versus Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

As anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) become increasingly common, differences between the 2 procedures are of importance. The purpose of this study was to determine differences in acute pain levels between patients undergoing aTSA and rTSA. Sixty patients undergoing aTSA or rTSA were assessed for participation. The primary outcome was postoperative daily visual analog scale scores, which were initially collected for 4 days postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption, length of stay, and complications. Comparisons between the 2 groups were assessed using a multivariable analysis, which controlled for sex, age, body mass index, and type of anesthetic. A total of 57 patients consented and were analyzed. No significant differences were found in postoperative visual analog scale scores in the first 4 days following surgery or at 1 year postoperatively. Patients undergoing aTSA had a higher mean opioid requirement in the first 4 hours postoperatively (1.0±0.7 vs 0.4±0.6 morphine milligram equivalents, P<.01). Forty percent of patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty were prescribed narcotics within the 3 months prior to surgery. Patients who were prescribed narcotics prior to surgery were more likely to continue to require narcotics at extended time periods postoperatively. Patients undergoing aTSA required more opioid medication in the immediate postoperative period. However, after 4 hours postoperatively, no significant differences in pain scores or opioid consumption were found. These findings suggest that patients undergoing aTSA or rTSA have similar postoperative pain profiles. Patients who are prescribed narcotics before shoulder arthroplasty are at an increased risk for postoperative opioid demand. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(2):e247-e252.].

Liposomal bupivacaine versus interscalene nerve block for pain control after shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective randomized trial.

HYPOTHESIS: Our hypothesis was that in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty, a prospective randomized trial would find no significant differences in average daily pain scores of those treated with interscalene nerve block (INB) vs. local liposomal bupivacaine (LB). METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty were assessed for eligibility. Study arms included either intraoperative local infiltration of LB (20 mL bupivacaine/20 mL saline) or preoperative INB, with a primary outcome of postoperative average daily visual analog scale scores for 4 days. Secondary outcomes assessed included opioid consumption, length of stay, and complications. Randomization was by a computerized algorithm. Only the observer was blinded to the intervention. RESULTS: Three patients were excluded, all before randomization. A total of 57 patients were analyzed. Outcomes showed a significant increase in pain in the LB group between 0 and 8 hours postoperatively (mean [standard deviation] 5.3 [2.2] vs. 2.5 [3.0]; P = .001). A significant increase in intravenous morphine equivalents was found in the INB group at 13 to 16 hours (mean [standard deviation] 1.2 [0.9] vs. 0.6 [0.7]; P = .01). No significant differences were found in any variable after postoperative day 0 between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: An increase in early postoperative pain on the day of surgery was found with LB, whereas the INB group required more narcotics at the end of the day. After the day of surgery, there were no significant differences found in any variables. These findings suggest that LB provides similar overall pain relief as INB, with no increase in complications or length of stay and a decrease in narcotic requirements on the day of surgery.

Patient Perceptions of Reimbursement for Arthroscopic Meniscectomy and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Historically, patient perceptions of surgeon reimbursement have been exaggerated compared with actual reimbursement. There is limited information about patient perceptions of physician reimbursement for arthroscopic meniscectomy and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This study evaluated patient perceptions of physician reimbursement for these procedures and compared perceptions of health care reform between urban and suburban clinics. Surveys were given to 231 consecutive patients, and patients were asked how much they believed a surgeon should be reimbursed for arthroscopic meniscectomy and ACL reconstruction as well as their perception of actual Medicare reimbursement to physicians. Patients were then informed of the actual reimbursement rates and asked additional questions about health care reform. Survey responses were compared in an urban setting vs a suburban setting. On average, patients reported that surgeons should receive $8096 for meniscectomy and $11,794 for ACL reconstruction. Patients estimated that Medicare paid physicians $5442 for meniscectomy and $6667 for ACL reconstruction. In addition, 65% of patients believed that reimbursement for meniscectomy was too low, and 57% of patients believed that reimbursement for ACL reconstruction was too low. Fewer than 2% of patients believed that surgeon salaries should be cut, and 75% believed that orthopedic surgeons should be paid more for subspecialty training. No differences were found in patients' perceptions of reimbursement or health care reform between urban and suburban settings. Patients perceived that the values of meniscectomy and ACL reconstruction were substantially higher than current Medicare reimbursement values and that surgeon salaries should not be cut. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(5):e904-e910.].

Meniscal allograft transplantation. Part 1: systematic review of graft biology, graft shrinkage, graft extrusion, graft sizing, and graft fixation.

PURPOSE: To provide a systematic review of the literature regarding five topics in meniscal allograft transplantation: graft biology, shrinkage, extrusion, sizing, and fixation. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed (MEDLINE), ScienceDirect, and EBSCO-CINAHL databases. Articles were classified only in one topic, but information contained could be reported into other topics. Information was classified according to type of study (animal, in vitro human, and in vivo human) and level of evidence (for in vivo human studies). RESULTS: Sixty-two studies were finally included: 30 biology, 3 graft shrinkage, 11 graft extrusion, 17 graft size, and 6 graft fixation (some studies were categorized in more than one topic). These studies corresponded to 22 animal studies, 22 in vitro human studies, and 23 in vivo human studies (7 level II, 10 level III, and 6 level IV). CONCLUSIONS: The principal conclusions were as follows: (a) Donor cells decrease after MAT and grafts are repopulated with host cells form synovium; (b) graft preservation alters collagen network (deep freezing) and causes cell apoptosis with loss of viable cells (cryopreservation); (c) graft shrinkage occurs mainly in lyophilized and gamma-irradiated grafts (less with cryopreservation); (d) graft extrusion is common but has no clinical/functional implications; (e) overall, MRI is not superior to plain radiograph for graft sizing; (f) graft width size matching is more important than length size matching; (g) height appears to be the most important factor influencing meniscal size; (h) bone fixation better restores contact mechanics than suture fixation, but there are no differences for pullout strength or functional results; and (i) suture fixation has more risk of graft extrusion compared to bone fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review of level II-IV studies, Level IV.

Meniscal allograft transplantation. Part 2: systematic review of transplant timing, outcomes, return to competition, associated procedures, and prevention of osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: To provide a systematic review of the literature regarding five topics in meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT): optimal timing for transplantation, outcomes, return to competition, associated procedures, and prevention of osteoarthritis. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed (MEDLINE), ScienceDirect, and EBSCO-CINAHL databases. Articles were classified only in one topic, but information contained could be reported into other topics. Information was classified according to type of study (animal, in vitro human, and in vivo human) and level of evidence (for in vivo human studies). Specific inclusion criteria were determined for the outcomes and prevention of osteoarthritis topics. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were finally included: two optimal timing, seven outcomes, three return to competitive sport, 16 MAT and associated procedures, and 5 MAT and prevention of osteoarthritis (some studies were categorized in more than one topic). These studies corresponded to 2 animal studies and 31 in vivo human studies (1 level II, 1 level III, and 29 level IV). CONCLUSIONS: The principal conclusions were as follows: (a) there is no evidence to support that MAT has to be performed at the same time or immediately after meniscectomy to prevent development of postmeniscectomy syndrome; (b) MAT successfully improves symptoms, function, and quality of life at 7-to-14 years of follow-up (level IV evidence); (c) the overall failure rate (need for knee arthroplasty) is 10-29% at long-term follow-up; (d) MAT allows return to same level of competition in 75-85% of patients at short- to mid-term follow-up (only three studies level IV evidence with small sample size); (e) associated cartilage procedures or anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction to MAT does not worsen the results; (f) MAT may prevent progression of cartilage damaged at long-term follow-up, but may not prevent degeneration in previously healthy cartilage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review of level II-IV studies, Level IV.

Predictors of outcome after nonoperative and operative treatment of adhesive capsulitis.

BACKGROUND: Few studies regarding adhesive capsulitis have concurrently evaluated nonoperative and operative treatment. PURPOSE: The objectives were to evaluate the efficacy of operative and nonoperative treatment of adhesive capsulitis and to determine predictors of clinical outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: At minimum 24 months' follow-up, 85 patients underwent self-assessment using the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, including 24 patients treated operatively. RESULTS: Mean number of yes responses on the SST improved from 4.0 ± 2.7 at initial presentation to 9.9 ± 2.8 at final follow-up (P < .0001). Patients who received nonoperative treatment and patients who underwent surgery demonstrated similar improvements on the SST. For the entire cohort, forward elevation and external rotation at the side improved from 119° ± 20° to 152° ± 15° and from 29° ± 18° to 46° ± 11° (P < .0001), respectively, between initial presentation and discharge from treatment. Internal rotation to the back improved from the gluteal area to the thoracolumbar junction (P < .0001). Improvements in forward elevation and external rotation were greater for patients undergoing surgery. After nonoperative treatment, patients with diabetes had a lower final SST than patients without diabetes (P < .05). For the entire cohort, initial SST predicted final SST (P < .05), and a shorter duration of symptoms predicted a higher final ASES score (P < .05). Younger patients (P < .001) and those with a lower initial SST (P < .05) were more likely to undergo surgery. CONCLUSIONS: A multimodal nonoperative treatment program is effective for most patients with adhesive capsulitis. Patients who do not improve, including those with diabetes, respond well to manipulation and arthroscopic release. Residual motion deficits at discharge from treatment do not appear to affect longer-term clinical outcome.