Publications

2019

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.