Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of radiographic classification of acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND: The classification and treatment of acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocations remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the Rockwood classification system. We hypothesized poor interobserver and intraobserver reliability, limiting the role of the Rockwood classification system in determining severity of AC joint dislocations and accurately guiding treatment decisions. METHODS: We identified 200 patients with AC joint injuries using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code 831.04. Fifty patients met inclusion criteria. Deidentified radiographs were compiled and presented to 6 fellowship-trained upper extremity orthopedic surgeons. The surgeons classified each patient into 1 of the 6 classification types described by Rockwood. A second review was performed several months later by 2 surgeons. A κ value was calculated to determine the interobserver and intraobserver reliability. RESULTS: The interobserver and intraobserver κ values were fair (κ = 0.278) and moderate (κ = 0.468), respectively. Interobserver results showed that 4 of the 50 radiographic images had a unanimous classification. Intraobserver results for the 2 surgeons showed that 18 of the 50 images were rated the same on second review by the first surgeon and 38 of the 50 images were rated the same on second review by the second surgeon. CONCLUSION: We found that the Rockwood classification system has limited interobserver and intraobserver reliability. We believe that unreliable classification may account for some of the inconsistent treatment outcomes among patients with similarly classified injuries. We suggest that a better classification system is needed to use radiographic imaging for diagnosis and treatment of AC joint dislocations.

A Concise and Comprehensive Description of Shoulder Pathology and Procedures: The 4D Code System.

Background. We introduce a novel description system of shoulder pathoanatomy. Its goal is to provide a comprehensive three-dimensional picture, with an additional component of time; thus, we call it the 4D code. Methods. Each line of the code starts with right versus left and a time designation. The pillar components are recorded regardless of pathology; they include subscapularis, long head of biceps tendon, supraspinatus, infraspinatus, and teres minor. Secondary elements can be added if there is observed pathology, including acromioclavicular joint, glenohumeral joint, labrum, tear configuration, location and extent of partial cuff tear, calcific tendonitis, fatty infiltration, and neuropathy. Results. We provide two illustrative examples of patients which show the ease and effectiveness of the 4D code. With a few simple lines, significant amount of information about patients' pathology, surgery, and recovery can be easily conveyed. Discussion. We utilize existing validated classification systems for parts of the shoulder and provide a frame work to build a comprehensive picture. The alphanumeric code provides a simple language that is universally understood. The 4D code is concise yet complete. It seeks to improve efficiency and accuracy of the communication, documentation, and visualization of shoulder pathology within individual practices and between providers.

Does the literature confirm superior clinical results in radiographically healed rotator cuffs after rotator cuff repair?

PURPOSE: Because recurrent or persistent defects in the rotator cuff after repair are common, we sought to clarify the correlation between structural integrity of the rotator cuff and clinical outcomes through a systematic review of relevant studies. METHODS: Medline, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for all literature published from January 1966 to December 2008 that used the key words shoulder, rotator cuff, rotator cuff tear, rotator cuff repair, arthroscopic, integrity, healed, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography arthrography (CTA), and ultrasound. The inclusion criteria were studies (Levels I to IV) that reported outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in healed and nonhealed repairs based on ultrasound, CTA, and/or MRI. Exclusionary criteria were studies that included open repair or subscapularis repair and studies that did not define outcomes based on healed versus nonhealed but rather used another variable (i.e., repair technique). Data were abstracted from the studies including patient demographics, tear characteristics, surgical procedure, rehabilitation, strength, range of motion, clinical scoring systems, and imaging studies. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in the final analysis: 5 used ultrasound, 4 used MRI, 2 used CTA, and 2 used combined CTA/MRI for diagnosis of a recurrent tear. Statistical improvement in patients who had an intact cuff at follow-up was seen in Constant scores in 6 of 9 studies; in University of California, Los Angeles scores in 1 of 2 studies; in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores in 0 of 3 studies; and in Simple Shoulder Test scores in 0 of 2 studies. Increased range of motion in forward elevation was seen in 2 of 5 studies and increased strength in forward elevation in 5 of 8 studies. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that some important differences in clinical outcomes likely exist between patients with healed and nonhealed rotator cuff repairs. Further study is needed to conclusively define this difference and identify other important prognostic factors related to clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review.

Does the literature support double-row suture anchor fixation for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? A systematic review comparing double-row and single-row suture anchor configuration.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of single-row (SR) and double-row (DR) suture anchor fixation in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with a systematic review of the published literature. METHODS: We searched all published literature from January 1966 to December 2008 using Medline, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for the following key words: shoulder, rotator cuff, rotator cuff tear, rotator cuff repair, arthroscopic, arthroscopic-assisted, single row, double row, and transosseous equivalent. The inclusion criteria were cohort studies (Levels I to III) that compared SR and DR suture anchor configuration for the arthroscopic treatment of full-thickness rotator cuff tears. The exclusion criteria were studies that lacked a comparison group, and, therefore, case series were excluded from the analysis. RESULTS: There were 5 studies that met the criteria and were included in the final analysis: 5 in the SR group and 5 in the DR group. Data were abstracted from the studies for patient demographics, rotator cuff tear characteristics, surgical procedure, rehabilitation, range of motion, clinical scoring systems, and imaging studies. CONCLUSIONS: There are no clinical differences between the SR and DR suture anchor repair techniques for arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs. At present, the data in the published literature do not support the use of DR suture anchor fixation to improve clinical outcome, but there are some studies that report that DR suture anchor fixation may improve tendon healing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Levels I to III studies.

Revision tibiotalar arthrodesis.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary recommendations for primary and revision ankle arthrodesis favor internal compression techniques involving the use of screw and/or plate fixation. While tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis with internal fixation may be a suitable method of salvage for the treatment of a failed tibiotalar arthrodesis in selected patients, ring external fixation has been reported as an alternative. We reviewed our experience with revision tibiotalar arthrodesis, with a focus on ring external fixation. METHODS: Forty-five consecutive patients underwent revision tibiotalar arthrodesis with use of repeat internal fixation (eleven patients), ring external fixation (twenty-two patients), or tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis (twelve patients). Union rates were assessed radiographically, and functional outcome was determined with use of preoperative and postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ankle-hindfoot scores. RESULTS: All forty-five patients were available for follow-up at an average of 50.3 months. The average ankle-hindfoot score improved from 31.1 points preoperatively to 65.8 points at the time of the most recent follow-up. At the time of the most recent follow-up, the union rate was 88.9% (forty of forty-five). Fusion was achieved with revision tibiotalar arthrodesis in thirty-six (80%) of forty-five patients, including eight of the eleven patients in the repeat internal fixation group, nineteen of the twenty-two patients in the ring external fixation group, and nine of the twelve patients in the tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis group. Re-revision led to union in four of five patients. The overall union rate for ring external fixation, including revision and re-revision tibiotalar arthrodeses, was 84.6% (twenty-two of twenty-six). The five patients with persistent nonunion following revision ankle arthrodesis opted for transtibial amputation. CONCLUSIONS: Revision tibiotalar arthrodesis leads to satisfactory limb salvage in a majority of patients. Ring external fixation may facilitate clinically acceptable limb salvage in complex cases when methods of internal fixation are limited or even contraindicated.

Management of bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty.

Bone deficiencies around the knee can present a substantial challenge during revision total knee arthroplasty. Bone loss occurs from stress shielding, osteolysis, chronic infection, and bone removed during implant extraction. Smaller defects have traditionally been treated with cement filling or allograft bone chips. Larger defects can be reconstructed with bulk allografts or custom prostheses. A hinged prosthesis may be necessary to account for ligamentous insufficiency. In addition to traditional methods of managing bone loss, recent developments include the use of metaphyseal-filling implants made of highly porous metal. These implants can be press-fit into host bone to accommodate large metaphyseal defects. Each revision knee surgery provides unique challenges, requiring proficiency in multiple techniques of bone loss management.

Spinal injuries in contact sports.

Contact and collision sports such as American football expose the athlete to a wide array of potential injuries. Knee injuries garner much of the attention, but spinal injuries are potentially catastrophic and all levels of medical coverage of football must be knowledgeable and prepared to attend to an athlete with a neck injury. Of the other possible spinal conditions, some resolve on their own, others might require conservative therapy, and still others might require surgical intervention. The spectrum of potential injury is wide, yet the medical team must practice and prepare to treat the possible catastrophic neck injury.