ChatGPT performance on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons maintenance of certification exam.

BACKGROUND: While multiple studies have tested the ability of large language models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, to pass standardized medical exams at different levels of training, LLMs have never been tested on surgical sub-specialty examinations, such as the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Maintenance of Certification (MOC). The purpose of this study was to compare results of ChatGPT 3.5, GPT-4, and fellowship-trained surgeons on the 2023 ASES MOC self-assessment exam. METHODS: ChatGPT 3.5 and GPT-4 were subjected to the same set of text-only questions from the ASES MOC exam, and GPT-4 was additionally subjected to image-based MOC exam questions. Question responses from both models were compared against the correct answers. Performance of both models was compared to corresponding average human performance on the same question subsets. One sided proportional z-test were utilized to analyze data. RESULTS: Humans performed significantly better than Chat GPT 3.5 on exclusively text-based questions (76.4% vs. 60.8%, P = .044). Humans also performed significantly better than GPT 4 on image-based questions (73.9% vs. 53.2%, P = .019). There was no significant difference between humans and GPT 4 in text-based questions (76.4% vs. 66.7%, P = .136). Accounting for all questions, humans significantly outperformed GPT-4 (75.3% vs. 60.2%, P = .012). GPT-4 did not perform statistically significantly betterer than ChatGPT 3.5 on text-only questions (66.7% vs. 60.8%, P = .268). DISCUSSION: Although human performance was overall superior, ChatGPT demonstrated the capacity to analyze orthopedic information and answer specialty-specific questions on the ASES MOC exam for both text and image-based questions. With continued advancements in deep learning, LLMs may someday rival exam performance of fellowship-trained surgeons.

Midterm follow-up of the Nexel total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Aseptic loosening is one of the most common complications of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Modern implants, such as the Nexel, have been designed in an attempt to decrease loosening. The present study aims to report implant survivorship, radiographic assessment of loosening and lucency, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients treated with the Nexel TEA at midterm follow-up. METHODS: Consecutive series of adult patients underwent TEA using the Nexel by a single surgeon via standardized technique. Patients with minimum 3-year follow-up with radiographic and PROM data were included. Survivorship was defined by the absence of revision. Loosening was assessed via the Wrightington method by 3 independent fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons. Lucency was analyzed across individual radiographic zones on orthogonal radiographs. PROMs included the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH), Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE), and EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). RESULTS: Thirty-eight consecutive patients (22 female, 16 male) with a mean age of 67 years underwent TEA via a triceps-sparing isolated medial window approach. Mean follow-up was 5.5 years (range 3-9). Primary diagnoses were as follows: 19 osteoarthritis (OA), 9 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 9 post-traumatic arthritis (PA), and 1 conversion of elbow arthrodesis. Overall survivorship was 97.4%, with 1 patient undergoing revision for infection. Loosening was found in 5.3% of elbows, averaged across 3 observers. Lucency was most pronounced at the level of the humeral condyles. PROMs demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful improvements in 76%, 92%, and 73% of patients for QuickDASH, PREE, and EQ-5D, respectively. No significant correlations were found between patient age, gender, loosening, lucency, and PROMs. CONCLUSION: At midterm follow-up, the Nexel TEA demonstrated excellent overall survivorship and low rate of implant loosening. The single failure requiring revision for infection was conversion of a prior elbow arthrodesis. PROMs overall exhibited marked and consistent improvement from preoperative to final postoperative follow-up. Although promising, these results should be interpreted with some caution as long-term data regarding this prosthesis are still lacking.

Modern Treatment of Cubital Tunnel Syndrome: Evidence and Controversy.

Cubital tunnel syndrome is the second most common peripheral mononeuropathy in the upper extremity. However, the diagnosis and treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome remains controversial without a standard algorithm. Although diagnosis can often be made from the patient's history and physical examination alone, electrodiagnostic studies, ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance image (MRI) can also be useful in diagnosing the disease and selecting the most appropriate treatment option. Treatment options include conservative nonoperative techniques as well as various surgical options, including in situ decompression with or without transposition, medial epicondylectomy, and nerve transfer in advanced disease. The purpose of this review is to summarize the most up-to-date literature regarding cubital tunnel syndrome and propose a treatment algorithm to provide clarity about the challenges of treating this complex patient population.

Trends and projections in surgical stabilization of glenohumeral instability in the United States from 2009 to 2030: rise of the Latarjet procedure and fall of open Bankart repair.

BACKGROUND: Advances in surgical techniques have improved the ability to address recurrent glenohumeral instability via arthroscopic capsulolabral repair and bone-restoring procedures such as the Latarjet procedure. Given the paucity of studies analyzing temporal trends in the surgical management of glenohumeral instability, the purpose of this study was to assess trends in the treatment of anterior, posterior, and multidirectional instability over a 10-year period and model projections to 2030. METHODS: Using the IBM Watson MarketScan national database, we identified all patients who underwent glenohumeral instability procedures from 2009 to 2018. Procedures were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes for open Bankart, Latarjet, anterior bone block, posterior bone block, multidirectional capsular shift, and arthroscopic Bankart procedures. Sample weights provided by the database were used to calculate national estimates. US Census Bureau annual population data were used to calculate incidence. Future projections to 2030 were modeled using Poisson and linear regression. RESULTS: There were an estimated 446,072 glenohumeral instability cases from 2009 to 2018. The per capita incidence (per 100,000) remained constant, from 14.8 in 2009 to 14.5 in 2018. Arthroscopic Bankart procedures comprised the highest number of procedures throughout the study period, accounting for 89% of all procedures in 2009 and 93% in 2018. The number of open Bankart procedures decreased by 65% from 2009 to 2018, whereas the number of Latarjet procedures showed a 250% increase over the same period. Patient demographics did not change over the study period, and male patients aged 18-25 years comprised the largest demographic group undergoing anterior instability procedures. Multidirectional instability procedures exhibited the least pronounced sex differences. Future modeling from 2018 to 2030 projected a continued steady rise in arthroscopic Bankart procedures (from 40,000 to 49,000 cases/yr), rapid growth in Latarjet procedures (from 1370 to 4300 cases/yr), and continued decline in open Bankart procedures (from 1000 to 250 cases/yr). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic Bankart repair continues to be the most common glenohumeral instability procedure in the United States. From 2009 to 2018, the incidence of open Bankart procedures declined whereas the incidence of Latarjet procedures markedly increased. Future projections to 2030 mirrored these findings. These data may provide an enhanced understanding of the evolution of surgical treatment of glenohumeral instability within the United States, laying the foundation for continued prospective studies into the appropriate indications and advancements in surgical techniques.

Volar versus dorsal approach for supinator to posterior interosseous nerve transfer: An anatomical study in cadavers.

INTRODUCTION: Supinator to posterior interosseous nerve (SPIN) transfer allows reconstruction of finger/thumb extension and thumb abduction for low radial nerve palsy, incomplete C6 tetraplegia, and brachial plexus injury affecting C7-T1. No study has compared dorsal versus volar approach to perform SPIN transfer. This comparison is studied in the present work, assessing supinator motor branch length and ability to achieve nerve transfer from either approach. METHODS: Ten fresh frozen cadavers were randomly allocated to receive either a dorsal or volar approach to PIN and supinator radial and ulnar branches (RB = radial, UB = ulnar). Supinator head innervation patterns were documented. RB and UB lengths, forearm lengths measured from ulnar styloid to olecranon, visualization of extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) motor nerve without additional dissection, and ability to perform tension-free nerve transfer were assessed. RESULTS: Nine of 10 specimens had supinator branches innervating both heads. The ECRB nerve was visualized in all volar but only one dorsal approach. No significant differences in forearm length were found. Volar with elbow extended: mean RB length was 35 ± 7.8 mm and UB was 37.8 ± 9.3 mm. Dorsal with elbow extended: mean RB length was 30 ± 4.1 mm and UB was 38.8 ± 7.3 mm. Dorsal with elbow flexed 90°: RB was 25.6 ± 3.8 mm and UB was 34.8 ± 4.8 mm. No significant differences were found in branch lengths between approaches (dorsal vs. volar UB, p = .339; dorsal vs. volar RB, p = .117). All limbs achieved tension-free coaptation. CONCLUSION: Neither approach demonstrated superiority in achieving tension-free nerve transfer. Volar permitted immediate identification of ECRB nerve whereas this was only visualized in one dorsal specimen without additional dissection. Overall, the volar approach allows direct coaptation in elbow extension, mimicking maximal physiologic tension for neurorrhaphy. It simultaneously permits additional procedures for pinch reconstruction via single exposure, circumventing limb/microscope maneuvering, dorsal dissection, and increased operative time. Ultimate choice of approach should depend on surgeon familiarity and potential need for additional simultaneous transfers.

Novel Diagnostic and Treatment Techniques for Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome.

Neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome is a challenging condition to diagnose and treat, often precipitated by the triad of repetitive overhead activity, pectoralis minor contracture, and scapular dyskinesia. The resultant protracted scapular posture creates gradual repetitive traction injury of the suprascapular nerve via tethering at the suprascapular notch and decreases the volume of the brachial plexus cords and axillary vessels in the retropectoralis minor space. A stepwise and exhaustive diagnostic protocol is essential to exclude alternate pathologies and confirm the diagnosis of this dynamic pathologic process. Ultrasound-guided injections of local anesthetic or botulinum toxin are a key factor in confirming the diagnosis and prognosticating potential response from surgical release. In patients who fail over 6 months of supervised physical therapy aimed at correcting scapular posture and stretching of the pectoralis minor, arthroscopic surgical release is indicated. We present our diagnostic algorithm and technique for arthroscopic suprascapular neurolysis, pectoralis minor release, brachial plexus neurolysis, and infraclavicular thoracic outlet decompression.