Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction of Delayed Distal Biceps Repairs without Graft Augmentation: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Distal biceps tendon tears are responsible for 3% to 10% of all biceps ruptures. Treated nonoperatively, these injuries result in poor endurance, loss of supination strength, and loss of flexion strength compared with those treated operatively with repair or reconstruction. When presenting in a chronic fashion, operative management can involve graft reconstruction or primary repair. When there is adequate tendon excursion and quality, primary repair is preferred. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the literature regarding outcomes of direct surgical repair of chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to perform this systematic review and for the presentation of results. A search of the literature was performed on the electronic database Medline, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Included studies evaluated subjective and objective outcomes after delayed treatment (≥4 weeks postinjury) for chronic distal biceps tendon ruptures, without use of graft augmentation. Subjective and objective outcome metrics such as functional scores, range of motion, strength, pain level, and return to employment were collected. RESULTS: Eight studies were reviewed. The studies included 124 patients with chronic distal biceps tendon tears, treated surgically after a mean delay to surgery of 121.8 days. Four studies included comparison of patients with acute and chronic tears, whereas the other 4 studies assessed chronic tears only. The findings of these 4 studies suggest that direct repair of chronic tears is correlated with a mildly higher rate of lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve (LABCN) injury palsy (10/82 [12.1%] chronic vs. 3/38 [7.9%] acute, p = 0.753); however, this complication was overwhelmingly transient. There were only 3 reported reruptures (3.19%) across 5 studies reporting this complication. Overall, patients who had undergone direct repair of chronic distal biceps tears had good patient satisfaction, outcomes, and range of motion. CONCLUSION: Direct repair of chronic distal biceps tendon tears without the use of graft reconstruction is associated with acceptable patient satisfaction, range of motion, and functional outcome scores, although transient LABCN palsy rates may be slightly higher. When sufficient residual tendon is present in the setting of chronic distal biceps rupture, direct repair is a viable treatment option. However, the existing literature regarding direct repair of chronic distal biceps repair is limited, and further prospective assessment directly comparing primary repair vs. reconstruction of chronic distal biceps ruptures is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Total shoulder arthroplasty using an inlay glenoid component for glenoid deficiency: mid- to long-term follow-up of a previously published cohort.

BACKGROUND: The short-term results of total shoulder arthroplasty with an inlay glenoid component performed by a single surgeon in patients with glenoid bone loss have previously been reported. The purpose of this study was to investigate the mid- to long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of these patients. METHODS: We identified a cohort of patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty with an inlay glenoid component performed by a single surgeon between 2010 and 2019 for severe glenoid dysplasia and/or glenoid bone loss. Patients with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up were evaluated regarding preoperative and postoperative range of motion, radiographic findings, visual analog scale pain scores, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores. RESULTS: Overall, 39 shoulders in 33 patients were treated with an inlay glenoid component for severe glenoid bone loss. Four patients were lost to follow-up, and 1 patient died with a well-functioning implant in place. The final cohort included 34 shoulders in 28 patients (46.4% female patients [13 of 28] and 53.6% male patients [15 of 28]) with a mean age of 66.9 years (range, 58-81 years) and mean follow-up period of 68.3 months. Of the 34 cases, 5 were revision cases. One patient died following 2-year follow-up. Of the shoulders, 10 were classified as Walch type A2, 4 were classified as Walch type B3, and 15 were classified as Walch type C; 5 shoulders were unable to be classified. We observed statistically significant increases in range of motion (forward elevation, 38.1° [P < .001]; external rotation, 18.8° [P < .001]) and improvement in the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (from 26.6 to 81.0, P < .001). Two patients underwent conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty at 2.2 and 1.7 years postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Inlay glenoid components provide a low rate of revision and improved clinical and functional outcomes at mid- to long-term follow-up.

Establishing maximal medical improvement following aseptic revision of shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder arthroplasty surgery volume continues to increase yearly. As the prevalence of shoulder replacement continues to rise, there will be a growing number of revision surgeries performed for a variety of indications. Understanding patient outcomes and recovery time following these procedures is critical, particularly as it relates to revision surgery, which generally has worse outcomes and longevity than primary arthroplasty. The point at which the peak of potential improvement is reached can be defined as the point of maximal medical improvement (MMI). The timing to MMI has previously been reported in the literature following both primary anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. However, to our knowledge, timing to MMI following revision shoulder arthroplasty has not been defined. The purpose of the present study, therefore, is to establish the time to MMI following aseptic revision shoulder arthroplasty using validated patient-reported outcome measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted following patients who underwent aseptic revision shoulder arthroplasty over a defined 3-year period. Multiple fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons from a single institution performed all operations. Those with at least 24 months of follow-up and multiple time points of postoperative patient-reported outcome scores were included in the analysis. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) scores and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores were prospectively recorded and followed over time. Exclusion criteria included revision surgeries done for infection, staged procedures following infection, and revision for periprosthetic fracture. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients met inclusion criteria. The mean preoperative ASES and SANE scores were 41.8 and 30.5, respectively. There was a trend toward improvement in both the ASES and SANE scores through the 6-9-month postoperative follow-up point, at which point clinically significant improvement was achieved, with mean values of, respectively, 76.9 and 81.2. No further improvement was achieved 9 months after surgery, although scores were generally maintained through an average final follow-up of 30 months, with final ASES and SANE scores of 70.1 and 67.8, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Following aseptic revision shoulder arthroplasty, clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcome scores are seen up to 9 months postoperatively, the point at which MMI is achieved. These findings serve to guide clinicians in counseling patients regarding their expected postoperative recovery following revision shoulder arthroplasty.