Publications

2021

Hughes, Jonathan D, Christopher M Gibbs, Rajiv P Reddy, Emily Whicker, Ravi Vaswani, Adam Eibel, Spencer Talentino, Adam J Popchak, Bryson P Lesniak, and Albert Lin. (2021) 2021. “Repair of High-Grade Partial Thickness Supraspinatus Tears After Surgical Completion of the Tear Have a Lower Retear Rate When Compared to Full-Thickness Tear Repair.”. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy : Official Journal of the ESSKA 29 (7): 2370-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06524-9.

PURPOSE: High-grade partial thickness rotator cuff tears (i.e., those involving at least 50% of the tendon thickness) are especially challenging to treat and various treatment strategies have been described. Prior studies have demonstrated equivalent outcomes between in situ tear fixation and tear completion repair techniques. However, it is unknown how repair of completed high-grade partial thickness tears to full tears compares to repair of full-thickness tears. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcome measures at least 1 year postoperatively between patients who had completion of a high-grade partial thickness supraspinatus tear to a full-thickness tear (PT) and those who had an isolated full-thickness supraspinatus tear (FT). The hypothesis of this study was equivalent retear rates as well as equivalent clinical and patient-reported outcomes between the two groups.

METHODS: A retrospective review of 100 patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic supraspinatus repair between 2013 and 2018 with a minimum of 1 year follow-up was performed. Patients were separated into two groups based on their treatment: 56 had completion of a partial thickness supraspinatus tear to full-thickness tear with repair (PT) and 44 had isolated full-thickness supraspinatus repairs (FT). The primary outcome was rotator cuff retear, which was defined as a supraspinatus retear requiring revision repair. Secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcome measures (PROs) including visual analog pain scale (VAS) and subjective shoulder value (SSV), range of motion (ROM) and strength in forward flexion (FF), external rotation (ER), and internal rotation (IR).

RESULTS: There was a significantly lower rate of retear between the PT versus FT groups (3.6% vs. 16.3%, p = 0.040). There were no significant differences between groups for all PROs, all ROM parameters, and all strength parameters (all n.s.).

DISCUSSION: The data from this study demonstrated that the PT group had a significantly lower retear rate at 1 year follow-up than the FT group, while PROs, ROM, and strength were similar between the two groups. Patients with PT supraspinatus tears can have excellent outcomes, equivalent to FT tears, after completion of the tear, and subsequent repair with low retear rates. These findings may aid the treating surgeon when choosing between in situ fixation of the PT supraspinatus tear or completion of the tear and subsequent repair, as it allows the treating surgeon to choose the procedure based on comfort and experience level.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Junior, Mauricio Drummond, Caroline Ayinon, Mark Rodosky, Dharmesh Vyas, Bryson Lesniak, and Albert Lin. (2021) 2021. “Predictive Factors for Failure of Conservative Management in the Treatment of Calcific Tendinitis of the Shoulder.”. JSES International 5 (3): 469-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseint.2021.01.013.

BACKGROUND: Calcific tendinitis of the shoulder is a painful condition characterized by the presence of calcium deposits within the tendons of the rotator cuff (RTC). When conservative management fails, arthroscopic surgery for removal of the calcium may be considered. Surgical removal is often followed by RTC repair to address the resulting tendon defect. This study was performed to assess predictive factors for failure of conservative management and to characterize the rate of RTC repair in the setting of calcific tendinitis. We hypothesize that larger calcific lesion would have a higher likelihood to fail conservative treatment.

METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who were diagnosed with calcific tendinitis at our institution between 2009 and 2019 was performed. Demographics, comorbidities, pain score (visual analog scale), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, range of motion, and patient-reported quality of life measures were recorded and analyzed. All patients underwent a radiograph and magnetic resonance imaging. Size of the calcific lesion was measured based on its largest diameter on magnetic resonance imaging. Statistical analysis included chi-square test, independent t-test, and analysis of variance.

RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-nine patients were identified in the study period; 127 (53.1%) were women. The mean age was 54 years, and body mass index was 29.2 with a mean follow-up of 6 months. One hundred and sixty had an intact RTC (67.2%) and 78 had a partial RTC tear (32.8%). Ninety-three of 239 (38.9%) patients failed conservative treatment after an average of 4.4 months, necessitating surgical management. Among patients who underwent surgery, the majority of patients (77 of 93 [82.8%]) required a concomitant RTC repair. Subanalysis demonstrates that calcific lesions >1 cm was significantly associated with failure of conservative treatment (odds ratio = 2.86, 95% confidence interval 1.25-6.29, P < .05). All patients who underwent surgery demonstrated significant improvements in pain scores (6.3 to 2.3 visual analog scale), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (47.9 to 90.49), forward flexion (133° to 146.8°), and external rotation (49.2° to 57.6°) (P < .05) postoperatively.

CONCLUSION: Patients with calcific lesions >1 cm had a 2.8× increased likelihood to undergo operative treatment in the setting of calcific tendinitis of the shoulder. Most patients who undergo surgical management for removal of the calcific deposit required a concomitant RTC repair and had significant improvements in shoulder pain and function. This information can be helpful to guide orthopedic surgeons on preoperative planning and discussion when treating calcific tendinitis of the shoulder.

Crum, Raphael J, Darren L de Sa, Favian L Su, Bryson P Lesniak, and Albert Lin. (2021) 2021. “Decreased Complication Profile and Improved Clinical Outcomes of Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty After 2010: A Systematic Review.”. Shoulder & Elbow 13 (2): 154-67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1758573219852977.

The purpose of this review was to update the complication profile of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) post-2010, given greater procedural familiarity, improved learning curves, enhanced implant designs, and increased attention to the nuances of patient selection. Three electronic databases were searched and screened in duplicate from 1 January 2010 to 16 December 2018 based on predetermined criteria. Twenty-two studies examining 1455 patients (26% male; mean age: 73.4 ± 3.6; mean follow-up: 23.4 ± 14.3 months) were reviewed. Post-operative motion ranged a mean 122.4° ± 11.5° flexion, 109° ± 19.4° abduction, and 33° ± 11.2°/41° ± 5° external/internal rotation. Post-operative mean Constant score was 58.9 ± 10.1, American Shoulder Elbow Surgeon score was 73.4 ± 6.1, Simple Shoulder Test score was 63.5 ± 6.5, and a Visual Analog Scale pain score was 1.6 ± 0.9. The overall complication rate was 18.2% and major complication rate was 15.4%. Compared to pre-2010, the overall complication rate of 18.2% is lower than previous rates of 19%-68%, with the rate of "major" complications dropping three-fold from 15.4% to 4.6%. The data suggest that rTSA is a safe and efficacious alternative to aTSA and HA, and the "stale" nature of previous complication profiles are points fundamental to perioperative discussions surrounding rTSA.

Li, Ryan T, Andrew Sheean, Kevin Wilson, Darren de Sa, Gillian Kane, Bryson Lesniak, and Albert Lin. (2021) 2021. “Decreased Glenoid Retroversion Is a Risk Factor for Failure of Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Individuals With Subcritical Bone Loss Versus No Bone Loss.”. Arthroscopy : the Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery : Official Publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association 37 (4): 1128-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2020.11.055.

PURPOSE: To determine whether glenoid retroversion is an independent risk factor for failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS: This was a retrospective review of patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up. In part 1 of the study, individuals with no glenoid bone loss on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and who failed arthroscopic Bankart repair (cases) were compared with individuals who did not fail Bankart repair (controls). In part 2 of the study, cases with subcritical (<20%) glenoid bone loss as measured on sagittal T1 MRI sequences who failed arthroscopic Bankart repair were compared with controls who did not. For each part of the study, glenoid version was measured using axial T2 MRI sequences. Positive angular measurements were designated to represent glenoid anteversion, whereas negative measurements were designated to represent glenoid retroversion. Independent t tests were conducted to determine the association between glenoid version and failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

RESULTS: There were 20 cases and 40 controls in part 1 of the study. In part 2, there were 19 cases and 21 controls. There was no difference in baseline characteristics between cases and controls. Among individuals with no glenoid bone loss, there was no difference in glenoid version between cases and controls (cases: 6.0° ± 8.1° vs controls: 5.1° ± 7.8°, P = .22). Among individuals with subcritical bone loss, cases (3.8° ± 4.4°) were associated with significantly less mean retroversion compared with controls (7.1° ± 2.8°, P = .0085). Decreased retroversion (odds ratio 1.34; 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.72, P = 20) was a significant independent predictor of failure using univariable logistic regression.

CONCLUSIONS: While glenoid retroversion is not associated with failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair in individuals with no glenoid bone loss, decreased retroversion is associated with failure in individuals with subcritical bone loss.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3: Retrospective review.

Li, Ryan T, Gillian Kane, Mauricio Drummond, Elan Golan, Kevin Wilson, Bryson P Lesniak, Mark Rodosky, and Albert Lin. (2021) 2021. “On-Track Lesions With a Small Distance to Dislocation Are Associated With Failure After Arthroscopic Anterior Shoulder Stabilization.”. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 103 (11): 961-67. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.20.00917.

BACKGROUND: Off-track lesions are strongly associated with failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, on-track lesions with a small distance-to-dislocation (DTD) value, or "near-track lesions," also may be at risk for failure. The purpose of the present study was to determine the association of DTD with failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 173 individuals who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair between 2007 and 2015. Glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesion size were measured with use of previously reported methods. Patients with failure were defined as those who sustained a dislocation after the index procedure, whereas controls were defined as individuals who did not. DTD was defined as the distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed for DTD to determine the critical threshold that would best predict failure. The study population was subdivided into individuals ≥20 years old and <20 years old.

RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients (16%) sustained a recurrent dislocation following Bankart repair. Increased glenoid bone loss (p < 0.001), longer Hill-Sachs lesion length (p < 0.001), and decreased DTD (p < 0.001) were independent predictors of failure. ROC curve analysis of DTD alone demonstrated that a threshold value of 8 mm could best predict failure (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.73). DTD had strong predictive power (AUC = 0.84) among individuals ≥20 years old and moderate predictive power (AUC = 0.69) among individuals <20 years old. Decreasing values of DTD were associated with a stepwise increase in the failure rate.

CONCLUSIONS: A "near-track" lesion with a DTD of <8 mm, particularly in individuals ≥20 years old, may be predictive of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair. When using the glenoid track concept as the basis for surgical decision-making, clinicians may need to consider the DTD value as a continuous variable to estimate failure instead of using a binary on-track/off-track designation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of Levels of Evidence.

2019

Catapano, M, D de Sa, S Ekhtiari, A Lin, A Bedi, and BP Lesinak. 2019. “Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction for Massive, Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review of Modern Literature.”. Arthroscopy .

Lacus, ultrices in ultrices tellus odio nunc urna. Massa aenean sed ipsum praesent enim. Porttitor iaculis augue pulvinar nam feugiat. Aliquam morbi ut ultricies elementum adipiscing purus proin semper. Viverra accumsan tempus, vitae auctor a. Dictumst cras dui sit feugiat. Enim nulla pulvinar urna sit eu placerat.

Nascetur nisi, tortor velit et ipsum commodo. Tempor massa, non suscipit at sagittis morbi eget euismod.

de Sa, Darren, Michelle E Arakgi, Jayson Lian, Raphael J Crum, Albert Lin, and Bryson P Lesniak. (2019) 2019. “Labral Repair Versus Biceps Tenodesis for Primary Surgical Management of Type II Superior Labrum Anterior to Posterior Tears: A Systematic Review.”. Arthroscopy : the Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery : Official Publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association 35 (6): 1927-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.12.015.

PURPOSE: To examine the outcomes of SLAP repair versus biceps tenodesis (BT) for the index treatment of isolated type II SLAP tears.

METHODS: A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE was performed in April 2018 for English-language studies that presented outcomes data on patients with isolated type II SLAP tears treated with either SLAP repair or BT at the primary surgical time point.

RESULTS: Twenty-three studies (i.e., 2 randomized control trials, 7 retrospective cohort, 3 prospective cohort, 4 case-control, and 7 case series) were included. Isolated type II SLAP tears were treated via SLAP repair in 781 patients with a mean age of 35 years (range, 22-58 years) and a mean postoperative follow-up of 35 months (range, 3-63 months). BT was performed in 100 patients with a mean age of 44 years (range, 18-64 years) and a mean postoperative follow-up of 32 months (range, 24-75 months). Similar postoperative scores were noted in both the SLAP repair and BT groups for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Constant, University of California, Los Angeles, and visual analog scale pain scores. The rate of return to sports was 20% to 95% for SLAP repair and 73% to 100% for BT. Reoperation rates for SLAP repair and BT were 2.9% to 40% and 0% to 15.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that SLAP repair and BT are both acceptable as index treatment for isolated type II SLAP tears. SLAP repair remains the most commonly performed index procedure; however, BT appears equally efficacious and may represent an attractive alternative.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.

Catapano, Michael, Darren de Sa, Seper Ekhtiari, Albert Lin, Asheesh Bedi, and Bryson P Lesniak. (2019) 2019. “Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction for Massive, Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review of Modern Literature.”. Arthroscopy : the Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery : Official Publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association 35 (4): 1243-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.09.033.

PURPOSE: To systematically review and evaluate the efficacy and complication profile of superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) as a technique to address massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCTs).

METHODS: Searches of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, and conference abstracts of 4 major conferences identified clinical studies addressing SCR for MIRCTs. Two reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts, and full texts, extracting data from eligible studies. Reported outcome measures and complications were descriptively analyzed.

RESULTS: A total of 10 studies, 7 full texts and 3 conference abstracts, satisfied the inclusion criteria. The included studies examined a total of 350 shoulders with a mean patient age of 60.6 years and mean follow-up period of 20.6 months postoperatively. Only 4 studies had a minimum of 24-month follow-up data. Statistically significant improvements in pain and function were noted in all studies reporting results, with mean improvement ranging from 29.4 to 68.5 and from 2.5 to 5.9 points across the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and visual analog scale score, respectively. Mean improvement in range of motion ranged from 21.7° to 64.0° in elevation and from 9.0° to 15.0° in external rotation. Statistically significant improvements in the postoperative acromiohumeral distance were noted in 4 of 5 reporting studies, with a mean increase ranging from 2.2 to 5.0 mm. The combined clinical and radiographic failure and/or retear rate ranged from 3.4% to 36.1%. Complications for all studies included deep infection (0%-2%), symptomatic suture anchor loosening (0%-4%), and severe shoulder contracture (0%-2%).

CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic SCR represents an accepted surgical option for patients with MIRCTs, with short-term improvements shown in pain, range of motion, and function. Although early results are promising, further studies are necessary to determine the long-term success of this technique and to better delineate the clinical indications, survivorship, and risk factors for failure in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.