Publications

BACKGROUND: The "distance to dislocation" (DTD) calculation has been proposed as 1 method to predict the risk of recurrent dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair for an "on-track" shoulder. Rates of recurrent dislocation at specific DTD values are unknown.

HYPOTHESIS: Among patients with "on-track" shoulder lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair, the rate of recurrent dislocation would increase as DTD values decrease.

STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 188 patients with "on-track" shoulder lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic anterior labral repair between 2007 and 2019, with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs interval, glenoid track, and DTD were determined from preoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. The rate of recurrent dislocation was determined at 2-mm DTD intervals. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between recurrent dislocation, patient characteristics, and bone loss variables. A multivariate regression model was created to predict the probability of failure at continuous DTD values. A subgroup analysis of failure rate based on collision sports participation was also performed.

RESULTS: A total of 29 patients (15.4%) sustained recurrent dislocations. Patient age (P = .046), multiple dislocations (P = .03), glenoid bone loss (P < .001), Hill-Sachs interval length (P < .001), and DTD (P < .001) were all independent predictors of failure. As the DTD decreased, the rate of recurrent dislocation increased. Below a DTD threshold of 10 mm, the recurrent dislocation rate increased exponentially. Up to a threshold of 24 mm, the failure rate for collision athletes remained >12.3%, independent of the DTD. Conversely, the failure rate among noncollision athletes decreased steadily as the DTD increased.

CONCLUSION: For "on-track" shoulder lesions, as the DTD approached 0 mm ("off-track" threshold), the risk of recurrent dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair increased significantly. Below a DTD threshold of 10 mm, the risk of failure increased exponentially. The risk of recurrent dislocation for collision sports athletes remained elevated at higher DTD values than for noncollision athletes.

PURPOSE: To assess demographic factors, comorbidities, radiographic variables, and injury patterns as potential prognostic indicators of poor functional and patient-reported outcomes following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in patients with concomitant glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis who underwent arthroscopic supraspinatus repairs between 2013 and 2018 with a minimum of 1-year follow up was performed. Demographic variables included age, tobacco use, alcohol use, diabetes, sex, hypercholesterolemia, and body mass index while injury patterns included partial- versus full-thickness tear, bicep tendon involvement, and osteoarthritis severity. Multivariate linear regression was used to identify independent predictors of visual analog pain scale (VAS), subjective shoulder value (SSV), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score as well as active range of motion (ROM) in forward flexion (FF) and external rotation (ER). Binary logistic regression was used to identify predictors of repair failure as well as postoperative strength in FF and ER.

RESULTS: In total, 91 patients (mean age 61.48 ± 9.4 years) were identified with an average follow up of 26.3 ± 5.7 months. Repair failures occurred in 9.9% (9/91 patients) of the total cohort. Postoperative outcomes were significantly improved with regards to visual analog pain scale, subjective shoulder value, ASES score, ROM in FF, FF strength, and external rotation strength compared with preoperative baseline. Obesity (P = .023) and diabetes (P = .010) were significant independent predictors of greater pain scores postoperatively. Obesity (P = .029) and tobacco use (P = .007) were significant predictors of lower ASES scores postoperatively. Finally, moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis was a significant risk factor for poor ROM and strength in FF postoperatively compared to mild osteoarthritis (P = .029). No variables were predictive of repair failure.

CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco use, obesity, and diabetes are associated with worse pain and patient-reported outcomes following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in the context of glenohumeral OA. In addition, moderate-to-severe OA is associated with worse strength and forward flexion compared to those with mild OA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

In recent years, an appreciation for the dynamic relationship between glenoid and humeral-sided bone loss and its importance to the pathomechanics of glenohumeral instability has substantially affected modern treatment algorithms. However, comparatively less attention has been paid to the influence of glenoid version on glenohumeral instability. Limited biomechanical data suggest that alterations in glenoid version may affect the forces necessary to destabilize the glenohumeral joint. However, this phenomenon has not been consistently corroborated by the results of clinical studies. Although increased glenoid retroversion may represent an independent risk factor for posterior glenohumeral instability, this relationship has not been reliably observed in the setting of anterior glenohumeral instability. Similarly, the effect of glenoid version on the failure rates of surgical stabilization procedures remains poorly understood.

BACKGROUND: Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) is a common comorbidity in patients with rotator cuff tears. However, the efficacy of rotator cuff repair in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA is still heavily debated. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and functional outcome measures following arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA vs. those without glenohumeral OA.

METHODS: A retrospective review of 206 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic supraspinatus repairs (both isolated and with accompanying infraspinatus and/or subscapularis involvement) between 2013 and 2018 with a minimum of 1-year follow-up was performed. Patients were separated into 2 groups based on the presence or absence of concomitant glenohumeral OA. The primary outcome was failure of repair, defined as the need for revision repair or a retear confirmed on postoperative magnetic resonance imaging. The secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcome measures including the visual analog scale pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score; active range of motion (ROM); and strength testing. Within the OA cohort, a subgroup analysis was conducted to compare outcomes between patients with mild OA and patients with moderate to severe OA.

RESULTS: There were 91 patients in the glenohumeral OA group and 115 patients in the control group. Significant differences in postoperative forward flexion (FF) ROM (153.55° ± 21.07° vs. 160.14° ± 17.26°, P = .001) and external rotation (ER) ROM (46.91° ± 11.95° vs. 52.25° ± 11.60°, P = .001) were observed between the glenohumeral OA and control groups. There were no significant differences between groups in revision repairs, retears, postoperative internal rotation ROM, all preoperative ROMs, all patient-reported outcome measures, and all strength parameters (all P > .05). For the subgroup analysis, there were 70 patients in the mild OA group and 21 patients in the moderate to severe OA group. We found a significant difference in postoperative FF strength (88.4% vs. 61.9% with 5 of 5 strength, P = .010) and ER strength (89.9% vs. 71.4% with 5 of 5 strength, P = .046) between the mild OA group and moderate to severe OA group. There were no significant differences between the groups in all other outcome measures.

DISCUSSION: Rotator cuff repair remains an excellent treatment option in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA. The data in this study demonstrate that rotator cuff repairs in patients with concomitant glenohumeral OA have similar clinical and functional outcomes to repairs in patients without OA with the exception of slightly decreased postoperative FF and ER ROM. Patients with moderate to severe OA may have slightly decreased FF and ER strength outcomes compared with patients with mild OA.

BACKGROUND: The time from symptom onset to surgery has been shown to impact functional outcomes after repair of traumatic rotator cuff tears (RCTs), but this temporal relationship has not yet been evaluated in patients with atraumatic, degenerative cuff tears. Furthermore, it has been shown that over time, atraumatic cuff tears tend to enlarge and become more symptomatic, retracted, and atrophic-factors that have been shown to decrease success rates after repair. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the time from symptom onset to surgery and postoperative outcomes in patients with atraumatic RCTs.

METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with degenerative, atraumatic RCTs who underwent surgery performed by 2 fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons and had at least 12 months of postoperative follow-up. These patients were divided into 2 cohorts based on the duration between symptom onset and surgery: early (<12 months) and delayed (≥12 months). The primary outcome measures included reoperation rate and failure of repair. Secondary outcomes included clinical measures of strength and range of motion and patient-reported outcome measures consisting of the Subjective Shoulder Value, visual analog scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment, and Brophy-Marx Activity Scale at last follow-up.

RESULTS: Of the 143 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 78 (54.5%) underwent surgery within 1 year of symptom onset whereas 65 (45.5%) underwent surgery after at least 1 year. There were no differences between groups regarding demographic or tear characteristics. At final follow-up, there were no differences between the early- and late-surgery groups regarding retear rate (12% vs. 9%, P = .65), reoperation rate (5% vs. 3%, P = .54), postoperative range of motion in any plane (P > .05), strength in external rotation and internal rotation, visual analog scale pain score, or Subjective Shoulder Value. A greater proportion of the early group (61%) than the late group (46%) experienced improvement in supraspinatus strength of ≥1 grade on manual muscle testing (P = .02) and post hoc analysis.

CONCLUSION: Despite our knowledge of the natural history of chronic, atraumatic RCTs, delaying surgical treatment for 1 year or more does not appear to significantly impact postoperative outcomes. Thus, it is reasonable for physicians to recommend either conservative or surgical treatment depending on patient-specific factors and expectations.

PURPOSE: To identify the rate and risk factors of posterior labral involvement in operatively managed Bankart lesions and assess the effectiveness of MRI arthrogram for preoperative identification of such injury patterns.

METHODS: A consecutive cohort of patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair were retrospectively reviewed. All subjects underwent a prearthroscopy MRI arthrogram. Operative findings were used as the gold standard for posterior labral tear extension. Patient demographic and surgical data were then analyzed to identify independent factors associated with the presence of concomitant posterior labral injury.

RESULTS: Of 124 patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart stabilization, 23 (19%) were noted to demonstrate posterior labral injury on arthroscopic evaluation. Factors associated with injury to the posterior labrum included those sustaining two or fewer dislocations events (P =.001), an earlier average presentation (P = .001), and a reported "contact" mechanism of dislocation (P = .02). Posterior labral involvement did not correlate with surgical positioning (beach-chair versus lateral) or the need for revision surgery. On the basis of review of preoperative imaging, MRI arthrogram demonstrated a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 95% for detection of posterior labral injury.

CONCLUSIONS: Posterior propagation of Bankart lesions is relatively common following shoulder dislocations, with a rate of 18.5%. Risk factors for posterior labral extension include two or fewer dislocations, early presentation from the time of injury, and contact sports. On the basis of these findings, careful assessment of the posterior labrum on MRI arthrogram may reveal the majority, but not all, of these lesions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective case-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: A viable treatment option for young patients with massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears is arthroscopic superior capsule reconstruction (SCR). SCR theoretically improves shoulder stability and function and decreases pain. However, no prospective studies to date have correlated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) healing with in vivo kinematic data. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between graft healing and in vivo kinematics, range of motion (ROM), strength, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS: Ten patients (8 men and 2 women; mean age, 63 ± 7 years) with irreparable rotator cuff tears underwent arthroscopic SCR with dermal allograft. Strength was measured with isometric internal rotation and external rotation (ER) at 0° of abduction, ER at 90° of abduction, and scapular-plane abduction, whereas ROM was measured during shoulder flexion, abduction, and ER and internal rotation at 90° of abduction both before and 1 year after SCR. PROs included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand surveys that were collected before and 1 year after SCR. Synchronized biplane radiographs were collected at 50 images/s before and 1 year after SCR while patients performed 3 trials of scapular-plane abduction. A validated volumetric tracking technique with submillimeter accuracy determined 6-df glenohumeral and scapular kinematics. The acromiohumeral distance (AHD), humeral head translation, and scapulohumeral rhythm (SHR) were calculated from the in vivo kinematics. Healing at 5 locations was evaluated on 1-year postoperative MRI scans: anterior and posterior glenoid, anterior and posterior humerus, and posteriorly along the infraspinatus. Each subject was given a score from 0 to 5 based on number of sites healed.

RESULTS: Of the 10 patients, 9 (90%) had complete (n = 4) or partial (n = 5) healing of the graft whereas 1 (10%) had complete failure at the glenoid. No correlation existed between MRI healing and the AHD, SHR, strength, ROM, or PROs. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores all significantly improved from before to 1 year after SCR regardless of graft healing.

CONCLUSIONS: The rate of complete or partial graft healing on MRI mimics findings of prior reports in the literature. MRI healing was correlated with humeral head anterior-posterior translation but not with the static and dynamic AHDs, SHR, humeral head superior-inferior translation, ROM, strength, or PROs 1 year after SCR. All PROs improved significantly from before to 1 year after SCR regardless of graft status on MRI. In vivo kinematic changes were small after SCR and not clinically significant, and the data suggest that improvements in clinical and functional outcomes may occur in the absence of full graft healing.

PURPOSE: The critical shoulder angle (CSA) has been implicated as a potential risk factor for failure following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR). However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the clinical usefulness of this measurement. Given these discrepancies and limited comparisons to clinical outcomes, the aim of the current study was to determine whether higher CSAs correlated with an increased retear rate after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and to determine if any association between CSA and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) exists. It was hypothesized that there would be no correlation between CSA and retear rate or PROs after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

METHODS: A total of 164 patients who underwent arthroscopic RCR were retrospectively reviewed. CSA was measured for each patient. Patients were then divided into a retear group of 18 patients and a non-retear group of 146 patients. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including PROMIS 10 score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Brophy score, and visual analog pain scores (VAS) were recorded post-operatively.

RESULTS: The average CSA was 31.2 ± 4.5° for the retear group and 32.2 ± 4.7° for the non-retear group (n.s.). No correlations were found between CSA and PROMIS score (n.s.), ASES score (n.s.), Brophy score (n.s.), or VAS (n.s.).

CONCLUSION: Critical shoulder angle had no correlation to retear rate or patient-reported outcomes. CSA should not be used as a clinical predictor to assess rotator cuff retear risk after arthroscopic RCR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

HYPOTHESIS/BACKGROUND: Treatment options for the biceps brachii tendon include tenotomy, arthroscopic tenodesis, and open tenodesis. Few studies to date have compared all treatment options in the context of a rotator cuff repair.

METHODS: A retrospective review of 100 patients who underwent arthroscopic supraspinatus repair between 2013 and 2018 with a minimum of one-year follow-up was performed. Patients were separated into the following 4 groups: (1) 57 had isolated supraspinatus repair with no biceps tendon surgery (SSP); (2) 16 had supraspinatus repair and biceps tenotomy; (3) 18 had supraspinatus repair and arthroscopic biceps tenodesis; (4) 9 had supraspinatus repair and an open biceps tenodesis (SSP + OT). The primary outcome was operative time. The secondary outcomes were cost analysis, complications, patient-reported outcome measures, range of motion, and strength testing.

RESULTS: The operative time for the SSP + OT group was significantly longer than that of the SSP group (P < .05) but was not significantly longer than that of the other groups. The cost for the SSP group was significantly less than the cost for the SSP + OT and supraspinatus repair and arthroscopic biceps tenodesis groups (P < .05 for both), whereas the cost for the supraspinatus repair and biceps tenotomy group was significantly less than the cost for the SSP + OT group (P < .05). There were no significant differences between groups for complications, all patient-reported outcome measues, all range of motion, and all strength parameters.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Operative time is the longest in open biceps tenodesis and is significantly longer than that of isolated supraspinatus repair. No significant differences in operative times or costs were identified in patients undergoing arthroscopic vs. open biceps tenodesis. All patients, irrespective of the type of biceps tendon procedure, had excellent clinical and functional outcomes at least one year after surgery. There was no difference in clinical or functional outcomes, or complications, among the 4 groups.