[Anterior shoulder dislocation: revised Dutch Clinical Guideline in practice]. / Primaire anterieure schouderluxatie.

Shoulder dislocations remain the most frequent of joint dislocations, with anterior displacement of the humeral head being the direction of dislocation seen most often (97%). Recently, the Dutch clinical guideline on shoulder dislocations has been revised on the basis of predetermined bottlenecks in clinical practice. In this paper, the guideline is translated to clinical practice by means of two fictional cases, in which the novel recommendations are incorporated. The following topics were systematically assessed based on the best available scientific evidence: primary diagnostics, reduction techniques, painmedication/ sedation surrounding reduction and the need for physiotherapy, stabilization surgery and immobilization. Also, a best practice care pathway is advocated. Since scientific evidence is often inconclusive to provide undebatable therapeutic rules, the committee graded the available evidence and additionally used expert opinion to carefully draft recommendations. The paper concludes with an overview of all the recommendations stated in the updated multidisciplinary guideline.

Total shoulder arthroplasty for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: does posterior humeral subluxation persist after correction of the glenoid version at 5 years minimum?

BACKGROUND: Primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis is associated with both excessive posterior humeral subluxation (PHS) and excessive glenoid retroversion in 40% of cases. These morphometric abnormalities are a particular issue because they may be responsible for a deterioration in long-term clinical and radiologic outcomes. The aim of this study was to perform a computed tomographic (CT) analysis of patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for primary osteoarthritis (OA) with B2-, B3-, or C-type glenoids in whom an attempt was made to correct for excessive glenoid retroversion and excessive posterior humeral subluxation intraoperatively. MATERIAL: We performed a retrospective, single-center study including 62 TSA patients with a preoperative PHS of the glenohumeral joint (31 men, 31 women, 70 ± 9 years) between January 2000 and January 2014. Glenoids were classified as B2 (32 cases), B3 (13 cases), or C (17 cases). Glenoid retroversion was corrected by anterior asymmetric reaming. Patients were reviewed for clinical and CT scan assessment with a mean follow-up of 8.3 years (minimum 5 years). At final follow-up, the CT images were reconstructed in the scapular plane. A PHS index >65% defined persistence. RESULTS: The revision-free rate was estimated at 93%. Correlation between PHS and retroversion was moderate preoperatively (ρ = 0.58) and strong at final follow-up (ρ = 0.73). Postoperative CT scans on average showed a surgical correction of PHS compared to preoperatively (79% vs. 65% respectively, P < .05) and retroversion (20° vs. 10° respectively, P < .05). At final follow-up, 25 of 62 patients had a persistence in the 2-dimensional (2D) model and 41 of 62 in the corrected 2D model. Persistence of PHS had no influence on clinical outcomes but did demonstrate a significantly higher glenoid loosening rate (20% vs. 59%, P < .05). CONCLUSION: Correlation between PHS and retroversion was moderate preoperatively and strengthened at long-term follow-up. Anterior asymmetric reaming allowed for a surgical improvement of both PHS and retroversion, but it was not sufficient to maintain a correction over time. Glenoid loosening was more frequent in case of PHS persistence but seemingly without clinical relevance.

BRASD trial: biomechanical reposition techniques in anterior shoulder dislocation-a randomized multicenter clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Biomechanical reduction techniques for shoulder dislocations have demonstrated high reduction success rates with a limited pain experience for the patient. We postulated that the combination of biomechanical reduction techniques with the shortest length of stay would also have the lowest pain experience and the highest first reduction success rate. METHODS: A randomized multicenter clinical trial was performed to compare different biomechanical reduction techniques in treating anterior shoulder dislocations without the use of invasive pain relief. Patients who were able to perform adduction of the arm were randomly assigned to Cunningham, the modified Milch, and the scapular manipulation technique. Those who were not able to do so were randomly assigned to modified Milch and the scapular manipulation technique. Primary outcomes were emergency department length of stay and pain experienced during the reduction process, measured by the numeric pain rating scale. Secondary outcomes were reduction time, reduction success, use of analgesics or sedatives, and complications. RESULTS: Three hundred eight patients were included, of whom 134 were in the adduction group. In both groups, no differences in emergency department length of stay and experienced pain were observed between the treatment arms. In the adduction group, the modified Milch technique had the highest first reduction success rates 52% (p = 0.016), within protocol 61% (p = 0.94), and with sedation in the ED 100% ( -). In the no-adduction group, the modified Milch was also the most successful primary reduction technique with 51% success (p = 0.040), within protocol 66% (p = 0.90), and with sedation in the ED 98% (p = 0.93). No complications were recorded in any of the techniques. CONCLUSION: A combination of biomechanical techniques resulted in a similar length of stay in the emergency department and showed similar pain scores with an overall high success rate of reduction. In both groups, the modified Milch had the highest first-reduction success rate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR5839-1 April 2016. Ethical committee Noord-Holland with the CCMO-number NL54173.094.15.

Arthroscopic revision cuff repair: do tendons have a second chance to heal?

BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated postoperative tendon integrity after reoperation for failed rotator cuff repair. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the anatomic and clinical outcomes of arthroscopic revision rotator cuff repair (AR-RCR) and identify the risk factors related to re-retear. METHODS: Sixty-nine consecutive patients (mean age, 55 years) with primary failed open (38%) or arthroscopic (62%) cuff repairs underwent AR-RCR and were reviewed regarding clinical examination findings and imaging studies. Patients with massive cuff tears and upward humeral migration (acromiohumeral distance < 6 mm) or glenohumeral osteoarthritis were excluded. Revision repair was performed by a single, experienced shoulder surgeon. Complete footprint coverage was achieved in all cases using a single-row (70%), double-row (19%), or side-to-side (11%) technique. The primary outcome measure was tendon healing assessed with magnetic resonance imaging (57 cases) or computed tomography arthrogram (12 cases) performed at minimum 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcome measures included functional outcome scores, subjective results, and complications. The mean follow-up period was 43 months (range, 12-136 months). RESULTS: The cuff tendons did not heal to the tuberosity in 36% of the shoulders (25 of 69) following revision cuff surgery. Absence of tendon healing was associated with poorer shoulder function (average Constant score, 69 ± 20 vs. 54 ± 18; P = .003) and a decreased Subjective Shoulder Value (72% vs. 54%, P = .002). Factors that were negatively associated with tendon healing were age ≥ 55 years (odds ratio [OR], 4.5 [95% confidence interval, 1.6-12.5]; P = .02), tendon retraction of stage 2 or higher (OR, 4.4 [95% confidence interval, 1.4-14.3]; P = .01), and fatty infiltration index > 2 (OR, 10.2; P < .0001). No differences in retear rates were found between single-row and double-row cases. In 36 shoulders, tissue samples were harvested and submitted for bacteriologic culture analysis; 13 (36%) showed positive findings for infection (Cutibacterium acnes in 12 of 13) and associated antibiotic treatment was given. Overall, 25% of patients had unsatisfactory clinical results and 22% were disappointed or dissatisfied. At last follow-up, 4 patients (5.7%) underwent reoperations, with a second AR-RCR in 1 and conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty in 3. CONCLUSION: Despite careful patient selection and intraoperative complete footprint coverage, in this study the tendons did not heal to bone in 36% of cases after revision cuff surgery. The absence of tendon healing is associated with poorer clinical and subjective results. Patients aged ≥ 55 years and patients with larger tears (stage 2 or higher) and/or muscle fatty infiltration (fatty infiltration index > 2) have significantly lower rates of healing. Surgeons should be aware that structurally failed cuff repair may also be associated with low-grade infection.

Arthroscopic Latarjet: 2 or 4 Cortical Buttons for Coracoid Fixation? A Case-Control Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: While 2 screws are traditionally used for coracoid bone block fixation, no gold standard technique has yet been established when using cortical buttons. PURPOSE: To compare anatomic and clinical outcomes of the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure using either 2 or 4 buttons for coracoid bone block fixation. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 23 patients with 4-button fixation (group 4B) were matched for age at surgery, sex, and follow-up to 46 patients who had 2-button fixation (group 2B). All patients underwent guided arthroscopic Latarjet (using coracoid and glenoid guides), and a tensioning device was used to rigidify the suture button construct and get intraoperative bone block compression. The primary outcome was assessment of bone block positioning and healing using computed tomography scans performed at 2 weeks and at least 6 months after surgery. The mean ± standard deviation follow-up was 49 ± 7 months (range, 24-64 months). RESULTS: The bone block healing rate was similar in both groups: 91% in group 4B versus 95.5% in group 2B. The transferred coracoid was flush to the glenoid surface in 21 patients (91%) in group 4B and 44 patients (96%) in group 2B (P = .6); it was under the equator in 22 patients (96%) in group 4B and 44 patients (96%) in group 2B (P≥ .99). There was no secondary bone block displacement; the rate of bone block resorption was similar between the groups: 28% in group 4B and 23% in group 2B (P = .71). Patient-reported outcomes, return to sports, and satisfaction were also similar between the groups. The operating time was significantly longer in group 4B (95 vs 75 minutes; P = .009). CONCLUSION: A 4-button fixation technique did not demonstrate any anatomic or clinical advantages when compared with a 2-button fixation technique, while making the procedure more complex and lengthening the operating time by 20 minutes. A 2-button fixation is simple, safe, and sufficient to solidly fix the transferred coracoid bone block. The use of drill guides allows accurate graft placement, while the use of a tensioning device to rigidify the suture button construct provides high rates of bone block healing with both techniques (>90%).

Bilateral scapulothoracic arthrodesis for facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy: function, fusion, and respiratory consequences.

BACKGROUND: Scapulothoracic arthrodesis (STA) has been proposed for the treatment of painful scapular winging in patients with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD). However, the rate of osseous fusion is variable, and there is a theoretical risk of reduced respiratory function after bilateral STA. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 10 STAs, performed sequentially, in 5 FSHD patients. The surgical technique involved use of a semitubular plate and wire construct with autograft (iliac crest) interposed between the scapula and rib cage. Osseous fusion, respiratory function, and shoulder function were evaluated. The mean follow-up period was 141 ± 67 months (range, 24-225 months). RESULTS: Early complications included 1 pneumothorax and 1 pleural effusion. No late complications occurred, and no patients underwent reoperation. On postoperative computed tomography images, complete bony union of the scapula to the ribs was observed in 90% of shoulders (9 of 10). Comparison of preoperative and postoperative pulmonary function test results showed no significant difference in vital capacity (from 87% ± 14% to 85% ± 12%) and forced vital capacity (from 86% ± 16% to 77% ± 15%). Patients gained on average 40° of active forward elevation (from 62° ± 20° to 102° ± 4°) and 22° of abduction (from 58° ± 21° to 89° ± 7°) (P < .001). The mean Subjective Shoulder Value increased from 25% ± 8% to 72% ± 18% (P < .001). All patients were pleased with the results and would recommend the procedure to other persons. CONCLUSION: In patients with FSHD, bilateral STA provides satisfactory shoulder function with a high rate of scapulothoracic fusion and few or no significant respiratory repercussions.

Pyrocarbon interposition shoulder arthroplasty in young arthritic patients: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated survival and midterm results of pyrocarbon interposition shoulder arthroplasty (PISA) in arthritic patients younger than 65 years. METHODS: Fifty-eight PISAs (InSpyre; Tornier-Wright, Bloomington, MN, USA), implanted in 56 patients between 2010 and 2015, were prospectively observed. The mean age at surgery was 52 ± 13 years. The cause was primary osteoarthritis (18), fracture sequelae (16), post-instability arthritis (15), aseptic necrosis (3), inflammatory disease (2), and failed hemiarthroplasty (4); 34 shoulders (61%) had previously undergone surgery. Glenoid erosion was assessed in 4 grades according to the Sperling classification. Humeral erosion was also assessed in 4 grades. Multivariate analysis was used to determine predisposing risk factors for both humeral and glenoid erosion. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 47 ± 15 months, survival rate was 90%. Six patients (10%) required conversion to reverse total shoulder prosthesis for painful glenoid erosion (n = 2) and humeral erosion with greater tuberosity stress fractures (n = 4). The mean Constant score and subjective shoulder value significantly increased from 36 ± 14 points to 70 ± 15 points and 32% ± 14% to 75% ± 19%, respectively (P < .001). Humeral medialization was observed in 78% of the cases with increased pain score. Uncorrected anteroposterior implant subluxation (12 cases) was associated with lower Constant score (50 points vs. 72 points; P = .02) and lower subjective shoulder value (53% vs. 78%; P = .002). On multivariate analysis, no risk factors for glenoid or humeral erosion were found. CONCLUSION: At midterm follow-up, PISA does not protect from progressive glenoid erosion and can lead to greater tuberosity erosion and stress fractures. Longer follow-up is required to see whether PISA survival will be superior to that of hemiarthroplasty.

Clavicle fractures in adults; current concepts.

BACKGROUND: For decades, clavicle fractures have been treated conservatively. In the last 20 years, however, non-union rates after conservative treatment appear higher than previously reported and more evidence regarding operative treatment has become available. This has led to a paradigm shift towards an increase in operative treatment. The aim of this review is to present the current concepts and available evidence regarding clavicle fracture treatment. METHODS: Conservative and operative treatment options together with their indications for medial, shaft and lateral clavicle fractures are discussed. For all three anatomical locations, a treatment algorithm is proposed. CONCLUSION: In general, non-displaced fractures are treated conservatively. Operative treatment has to be discussed with patients with displaced clavicle fractures, especially in the young and active patient.

Operative treatment versus nonoperative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare re-rupture rate, complication rate, and functional outcome after operative versus nonoperative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures; to compare re-rupture rate after early and late full weight bearing; to evaluate re-rupture rate after functional rehabilitation with early range of motion; and to compare effect estimates from randomised controlled trials and observational studies. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: PubMed/Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were last searched on 25 April 2018 for studies comparing operative versus nonoperative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and observational studies reporting on comparison of operative versus nonoperative treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extraction was performed independently in pairs, by four reviewers, with the use of a predefined data extraction file. Outcomes were pooled using random effects models and presented as risk difference, risk ratio, or mean difference, with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: 29 studies were included-10 randomised controlled trials and 19 observational studies. The 10 trials included 944 (6%) patients, and the 19 observational studies included 14 918 (94%) patients. A significant reduction in re-ruptures was seen after operative treatment (2.3%) compared with nonoperative treatment (3.9%) (risk difference 1.6%; risk ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.60; P<0.001; I2=22%). Operative treatment resulted in a significantly higher complication rate than nonoperative treatment (4.9% v 1.6%; risk difference 3.3%; risk ratio 2.76, 1.84 to 4.13; P<0.001; I2=45%). The main difference in complication rate was attributable to the incidence of infection (2.8%) in the operative group. A similar reduction in re-rupture rate in favour of operative treatment was seen after both early and late full weight bearing. No significant difference in re-rupture rate was seen between operative and nonoperative treatment in studies that used accelerated functional rehabilitation with early range of motion (risk ratio 0.60, 0.26 to 1.37; P=0.23; I2=0%). No difference in effect estimates was seen between randomised controlled trials and observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that operative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures reduces the risk of re-rupture compared with nonoperative treatment. However, re-rupture rates are low and differences between treatment groups are small (risk difference 1.6%). Operative treatment results in a higher risk of other complications (risk difference 3.3%). The final decision on the management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures should be based on patient specific factors and shared decision making. This review emphasises the potential benefits of adding high quality observational studies in meta-analyses for the evaluation of objective outcome measures after surgical treatment.

Operative versus nonoperative treatment of proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and comparison of observational studies and randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the choice of treatment for displaced proximal humeral fractures in older patients (aged > 65 years). The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were (1) to compare operative with nonoperative management of displaced proximal humeral fractures and (2) to compare effect estimates obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. METHODS: The databases of MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched on September 5, 2017, for studies comparing operative versus nonoperative treatment of proximal humeral fractures; both RCTs and observational studies were included. The criteria of the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies, a validated instrument for methodologic quality assessment, were used to assess study quality. The primary outcome measure was physical function as measured by the absolute Constant-Murley score after operative or nonoperative treatment. Secondary outcome measures were major reinterventions, nonunion, and avascular necrosis. RESULTS: We included 22 studies, comprising 7 RCTs and 15 observational studies, resulting in 1743 patients in total: 910 treated operatively and 833 nonoperatively. The average age was 68.3 years, and 75% of patients were women. There was no difference in functional outcome between operative and nonoperative treatment, with a mean difference of -0.87 (95% confidence interval, -5.13 to 3.38; P = .69; I2 = 69%). Major reinterventions occurred more often in the operative group. Pooled effects of RCTs were similar to pooled effects of observational studies for all outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend nonoperative treatment for the average elderly patient (aged > 65 years) with a displaced proximal humeral fracture. Pooled effects of observational studies were similar to those of RCTs, and including observational studies led to more generalizable conclusions.

Surgical fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review of biomechanical studies.

PURPOSE: Surgical treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures requires a decision between plate fixation and intramedullary (IM) fixation. Numerous studies report on the biomechanical properties of various repair constructs. The goal of this systematic review was to provide an overview of studies describing the biomechanical properties of the most commonly used surgical fixations of midshaft clavicle fractures. Additionally, we aimed to translate these biomechanical results into clinically relevant conclusions. METHODS: A computer-aided search of the EMBASE and PudMed/MEDLINE databases was conducted. Studies included for review compared biomechanical properties of plate fixation with IM fixation and superiorly positioned plates with anteroinferiorly positioned plates for midshaft clavicle fractures. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were eligible for inclusion. Plate fixation seemed to form a more robust construct than IM fixation in terms of stiffness and failure loading. The remaining clavicle was stronger after removal of the IM device than after removal of the plate. Superior plating of transverse fractures generally seemed to provide greater stiffness and strength during bending loads than anteroinferior plating did. The absence of cortical alignment in wedge and comminuted fractures directly influenced the fixation stability for both IM fixation and plate fixation, regardless of location. CONCLUSION: Each type of fracture fixation has biomechanical advantages and disadvantages. However, exact thresholds of stiffness for inducing healing and failure strength to withstand refractures are unknown. The clinical relevance of the biomechanical studies may be arguable. Since none of the studies investigate the effect of tissue adaptation over time they should be interpreted with caution.

Intramedullary Fixation of Midshaft Clavicle Fractures.

Clavicle fractures are among the most common fractures occurring in the general population, and the vast majority are localized in the midshaft portion of the bone. Management of midshaft clavicle fractures remains controversial. Although many can be managed nonoperatively, certain patient populations and fracture patterns, such as completely displaced and shortened fractures, are at risk of less optimal outcomes with nonoperative management; surgical intervention should be considered in such cases. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate our technique of midshaft clavicle fixation using minimally invasive intramedullary fixation.

Comparing fracture healing disorders and long-term functional outcome of polytrauma patients and patients with an isolated displaced midshaft clavicle fracture.

BACKGROUND: Although clavicle fractures are a common injury in polytrauma patients, the functional outcome of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures (DMCFs) in this population is unknown. Our hypothesis was that there would be no differences in fracture healing disorders or functional outcome in polytrauma patients with a DMCF compared with patients with an isolated DMCF, regardless of the treatment modality. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients (treated at our level I trauma center) with a DMCF was performed and a follow-up questionnaire was administered. Polytrauma patients, defined as an Injury Severity Score ≥16, and those with an isolated clavicle fracture were compared. Fracture healing disorders (nonunion and delayed union) and delayed fixation rates were determined. Functional outcome was assessed by the Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 152 patients were analyzed, 71 polytrauma patients and 81 patients with an isolated DMCF. Questionnaire response of 121 patients (80%) was available (mean, 53 months; standard deviation, 22 months). No differences were found between polytrauma patients and those with an isolated DMCF with regard to nonunion (7% vs. 5%, respectively), delayed union (4% vs. 4%), and delayed fixation rate (13% vs. 13%). Polytrauma patients had an overall worse functional outcome, regardless of initial nonoperative treatment or delayed operative fixation. CONCLUSION: Polytrauma patients had a similar nonunion and delayed fixation rate but had an overall worse functional outcome compared with patients with an isolated DMCF. For polytrauma patients, a wait and see approach can be advocated without the risk of decreased upper extremity function after delayed fixation.

Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Midshaft Clavicle Fractures in Patients Aged 16 Years and Older: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Comparison of Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Studies.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the choice of treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures (MCFs). PURPOSE: The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were (1) to compare fracture healing disorders and functional outcomes of surgical versus nonsurgical treatment of MCFs and (2) to compare effect estimates obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: The PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were searched for both RCTs and observational studies. Using the MINORS instrument, all included studies were assessed on their methodological quality. The primary outcome was a nonunion. Effects of surgical versus nonsurgical treatment were estimated using random-effects meta-analysis models. RESULTS: A total of 20 studies were included, of which 8 were RCTs and 12 were observational studies including 1760 patients. Results were similar across the different study designs. A meta-analysis of 19 studies revealed that nonunions were significantly less common after surgical treatment than after nonsurgical treatment (odds ratio [OR], 0.18 [95% CI, 0.10-0.33]). The risk of malunions did not differ between surgical and nonsurgical treatment (OR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.12-1.19]). Both the long-term Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Constant-Murley scores favored surgical treatment (DASH: mean difference [MD], -2.04 [95% CI, -3.56 to -0.52]; Constant-Murley: MD, 3.23 [95% CI, 1.52 to 4.95]). No differences were observed regarding revision surgery (OR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.42-1.73]). Including only high-quality studies, both the number of malunions and days to return to work show significant differences in favor of surgical treatment (malunions: OR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.92]; return to work: MD, -8.64 [95% CI, -16.22 to -1.05]). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis of high-quality studies showed that surgical treatment of MCFs results in fewer nonunions, fewer malunions, and an accelerated return to work compared with nonsurgical treatment. A meta-analysis of surgical treatments need not be restricted to randomized trials, provided that the included observational studies are of high quality.

Introducing the Surgical Therapeutic Index in trauma surgery: an assessment tool for the benefits and risks of operative fracture treatment strategies.

BACKGROUND: The Surgical Therapeutic Index (STI) has been described as an indicator of the benefits and risks of surgical treatment. The index is calculated by dividing the cure rate of an operative treatment by the complication rate. This study introduces the STI in trauma surgery by comparing the indices for surgical plate fixation (PF) and intramedullary fixation (IMF) of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. METHODS: In a previously reported, randomized controlled fashion, 120 patients were assigned to PF or IMF. Cure was defined by a Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score of 8 or less. Complications were noted as present or not present for each follow-up assessment, and a panel of experts provided weights to the severity of complications. STIs were reported along with their 95% confidence intervals. The higher a procedure's STI, the higher the benefit/risk balance of that procedure. RESULTS: The nonweighted STI after 6 weeks was significantly higher in the PF group. During further follow- up, the differences leveled out and became nonsignificant. When weighting the STI for severity, the indices decrease but are significantly in favor of the PF group at 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. At 1 year postoperatively, differences are not significant. CONCLUSION: The STI may be a reliable tool to assess the benefits and risks of operative fracture treatment. Further studies with consistent results of this new scoring system are needed before conclusions can be generalized. When determining the indices of PF and IMF, a significant difference in favor of PF was observed during the early phase of recovery.

Plate fixation or intramedullary fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies.

BACKGROUND: The last decade has shown a shift toward operative treatment of a subset of midshaft clavicle fractures. However, it is unclear whether there are differences between plate fixation and intramedullary fixation regarding complications and functional outcome. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare plate fixation and intramedullary fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures. METHODS: The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for both randomized controlled trials and observational studies. The methodologic quality of all included studies was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. RESULTS: Twenty studies were included. Ten of the 20 included studies used a fracture classification. Seven of these studies reported exclusion of patients with comminuted fractures. No difference in the total re-intervention rate was found (odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 2.04). Major re-interventions occurred more often after plate fixation (OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.02 to 3.46). The mean implant removal rates were 38% after plate fixation and 73% after intramedullary fixation. Re-fracture after implant removal occurred more often after plate fixation (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 1.12 to 10.42). The Constant-Murley scores showed no differences at both short term (mean difference, -1.18; 95% CI, -13.41 to 11.05) and long term (mean difference, 0.15; 95% CI, -1.57 to 1.87). No differences were observed regarding nonunion (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.82 to 2.75). The rate of infections showed no differences when outlier studies were excluded (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.88 to 2.69). CONCLUSION: Major re-intervention and re-fracture after implant removal occurred more frequently after plate fixation of non-comminuted, displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. No differences in terms of function and nonunion between plate fixation and intramedullary fixation were observed.

Operative treatment of dislocated midshaft clavicular fractures: plate or intramedullary nail fixation? A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decades, the operative treatment of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures has increased. The aim of this study was to compare short and midterm results of open reduction and plate fixation with those of intramedullary nailing for displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial was performed in four different hospitals. The study included 120 patients, eighteen to sixty-five years of age, treated with either open reduction and plate fixation (n = 58) or intramedullary nailing (n = 62). Preoperative and postoperative shoulder function scores and complications were documented until one year postoperatively. Significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: No significant differences in the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) or Constant-Murley score (3.0 and 96.0 points for the plate group and 5.6 and 95.5 points for the nailing group) were noted between the two surgical interventions at six months postoperatively. Until six months after the surgery, the plate-fixation group experienced less disability than the nailing group as indicated by the area under the curve of the DASH scores for this time period (p = 0.02). The mean numbers of complications per patient, irrespective of their severity, were similar between the plate-fixation (0.67) and nailing (0.74) groups (p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: The patients in the plate-fixation group recovered faster than the patients in the intramedullary nailing group, but the groups had similar results at six months postoperatively and the time of final follow-up. The rate of complications requiring revision surgery was low. Implant-related complications occurred frequently and could often be treated by implant removal.

Systematic review of complications after intramedullary fixation for displaced midshaft clavicle fractures.

BACKGROUND: The number of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures treated surgically is increasing, and open reduction and intramedullary fixation is an emerging surgical treatment option. The study quality and scientific levels of published evidence in which possible complications of this treatment are presented vary greatly. METHODS: We performed systematic computer-based searches of EMBASE and PubMed/MEDLINE. Studies included for review reported complications after intramedullary fixation alone or in comparison to either treatment with plate fixation and/or nonoperative treatment. The Level of Evidence rating and Quality Assessment Tool were used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. Included studies were ranked according to their levels of evidence. RESULTS: Six articles were eligible for inclusion and final quality assessment; 3 studies were graded the highest level of evidence. Major complications like bone-healing problems and deep infections requiring implant removal were reported at a rate no higher than 7%. Reported rates for minor complications, such as wound infection and implant irritation that could be resolved without further surgery, were as high as 31%. CONCLUSION: The noted rates for major complications requiring additional surgery were low, but implant-related problems that require additional surgery might present with high prevalence. Owing to routine implant removal, treatment with intramedullary fixation often requires an additional surgical procedure.

Biomechanical analysis of two-tendon posterosuperior rotator cuff tear repairs: extended linked repairs and augmented repairs.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare single-row (SR), extended double-row (DR), and augmented, extended double-row (aDR) rotator cuff repairs in a two-tendon, posterosuperior rotator cuff tear (RCT) model with intact rotator cuff tendons. METHODS: RCTs were created and randomly assigned to SR, DR, or aDR repair (5 each) in 20 cadaveric shoulder specimens. A collagen scaffold was used for augmentation. In the remaining 5 specimens, the rotator cuffs were left intact. All specimens were cyclically loaded from 25 to 75 N for 50 cycles. Every 50 cycles, peak load was increased by 25 N until failure occurred. Cyclic stiffness and number of cycles were analyzed. RESULTS: The SR (72.9 ± 4.64 N/mm)- and aDR (72.6 ± 11.8 N/mm)-repaired specimens differed significantly in stiffness from the intact specimens (93.1 ± 14.8 N/mm) at ≥100 N (P < .05). The intact specimens and DR- and aDR-repaired specimens endured more cycles to failure (1,556 ± 677, 1,302 ± 248, and 1,211 ± 95, respectively) than the SR-repair specimens (388 ± 72 cycles, 260 ± 4 N) (P < .05 for all groups). CONCLUSIONS: Linked DR constructs were significantly stronger than SR repairs in this two-tendon RCT model and approached the strength of the intact rotator cuff. Augmentation with a collagen patch (aDR) did not influence biomechanical repair qualities in this model, but did result in less variability in failure load and more consistency in the mode of failure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The biomechanical properties of extended linked DR constructs are superior to those of SR constructs for repair of two-tendon RCTs, and are not compromised by graft augmentation.

Technique and outcomes of arthroscopic scapulothoracic bursectomy and partial scapulectomy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of arthroscopic scapulothoracic bursectomy in patients with snapping scapula syndrome with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. METHODS: In this institutional review board-approved retrospective study, 23 shoulders in 21 consecutive patients were identified that had undergone arthroscopic treatment of snapping scapula syndrome. Each patient described mechanical symptoms with failure of nonsurgical modalities and reported symptomatic relief from a local anesthetic injection before surgical intervention. Preoperative and postoperative pain and functioning levels were assessed with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), QuickDASH (shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) shoulder scores, and patient satisfaction was recorded on a 10-point visual analog scale. Univariate and paired t tests were used for data analysis. Significance was established at P ≤ .05. RESULTS: The mean age at the time of surgery was 33 years (SD, 14 years). A scapulothoracic bursectomy alone was performed in 2 shoulders, and the remaining 21 shoulders underwent both bursectomy and scapuloplasty of the superomedial or inferomedial scapular border. At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years (SD, 0.57 years), a significant improvement in the median ASES score was noted, from 53 points (range, 17 to 83 points) preoperatively to 73 points (range, 32 to 100 points) postoperatively (P = .001). The mean SANE and QuickDASH scores at follow-up were 73 (SD, 27) and 35 (SD, 30), respectively. Overall, median patient satisfaction with surgical outcome was 6 of 10 (range, 1 to 10). Of the shoulders, 3 (13%) underwent revision for persistent scapulothoracic pain. CONCLUSIONS: Snapping scapula syndrome can be a debilitating disorder. Although significant pain and functional improvement can be expected after arthroscopic bursectomy and scapuloplasty, the average postoperative ASES and SANE scores remain lower than expected. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.