The role of index humeral stem length and convertibility in outcomes after revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

The aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and the Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) score in patients treated with a volar locking plate for a distal radial fracture. This study was a retrospective review of a prospective database of 155 patients who underwent internal fixation with a volar locking plate for a distal radial fracture between August 2014 and April 2017. Data which were collected included postoperative PROMs (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH) and Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE)), and SANE scores at one month (n = 153), two months (n = 155), three months (n = 144), six months (n = 128), and one year (n = 73) after operation. Patients with incomplete data were excluded from this study. Correlation and agreement between PROMs and SANE scores were evaluated. Subgroup analyses were carried out to identify correlations according to variables such as age, the length of follow-up, and subcategories of the PRWE score. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) between PROMs and SANE scores was -0.76 (p < 0.001) for DASH and -0.72 (p < 0.001) for PRWE, respectively. Limits of agreement between PROMs and '100-SANE' scores were met for at least 93% of the data points. In subgroup analysis, there were significant negative correlations between PROMs and SANE scores for all age groups and for follow-up of more than six months. The correlation coefficient between PRWE subcategories and SANE score was -0.67 (p < 0.001) for PRWE pain score and -0.69 (p < 0.001) for PRWE function score, respectively. We found a significant correlation between postoperative SANE and PROMs in patients treated with a volar locking plate for a distal radial fracture. The SANE score is thus a reliable indicator of outcome for patients who undergo surgical treatment for a radial fracture. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):744-748.

Objectives:Lateral epicondylitis is the most common condition affecting the elbow however conservative treatment for the condition remains controversial. Various approaches have been described including braces, physical therapy, corticosteroid injections, and platelet-rich-plasma (PRP) injections. PRP is taken from a centrifuged blood sample and consists mainly of platelets and growth factors. Although research surrounding injections in lateral epicondylitis continues to evolve, randomized controlled trials have shown that PRP injections are associated with decreased pain at two-year follow-up. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores and other patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) have been used previously; however, no studies to date have used the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE). It was hypothesized that patients would report improvements in pain and function at four weeks and four months after PRP injection. The primary outcomes were SANE and VAS pain scores. The secondary aim was to determine a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) value for SANE for this procedure.Methods:This was a retrospective review of a prospectively collected PROM database from 2021-2023. All patients who received a PRP injection for lateral epicondylitis were included in this study. Patients were excluded if they were missing baseline SANE or VAS pain scores, received an injection anywhere besides the common extensor tendon origin, or had overlapping conditions such as cervical radiculopathy, cubital tunnel or carpal tunnel syndrome. Baseline patient characteristics including sex, age, smoking history, history of depression or anxiety, disease chronicity, and hand dominance were collected. Previous history of physical therapy, corticosteroid injection, PRP injection, and procedure characteristics including milliliters (ml) of PRP injected and number of fenestrations were also collected. All PRP injections were ultrasound guided and conducted using the health-system standardized protocol with leukocyte-rich plasma. Primary outcomes included SANE and VAS pain scores at baseline, four weeks, and four months post-injection. MCID was calculated using the distribution-based method, calculated as half of the standard deviation of the change in SANE score. Additional outcomes included if the patient experienced any adverse events following injection, underwent subsequent injection within the study period.Results:A total of 36 patients met criteria for analysis. More than half the patients were male (n=20, 55.6%), and the average age was 50.15±9.31 years. Only 5.6% of patients were current smokers (n=2). Fifteen patients (41.7%) had histories of depression, and 10 patients (27.8%) had histories of anxiety. Most patients received an injection after experiencing symptoms for 10.62±9.56 months on average. The majority of patients previously tried or were concurrently going to physical therapy (n=28, 77.8%). Fourteen patients (38.9%) had received a previous corticosteroid injection, and five patients (13.9%) had received a previous PRP injection.The injection procedure typically consisted of 2.36±0.66 ml of PRP with 5.74±3.03 fenestrations. Most injections were done in the dominant arm (n=28, 77.8%). A total of six patients went on to have a repeat injection (16.7%). There were five patients who experienced increased post-procedure pain (13.9%) and one who experienced nerve irritation (2.8%). All adverse events eventually resolved.SANE scores at baseline, four-week, and four-month follow-up were 53.06±23.28, 57.22±27.32, 65.19±27.07. The difference between baseline and follow-up at four weeks was not statistically significant (p=0.245), but the follow-up scores at four months were found to be statistically higher than baseline scores (p=0.044). The average changes from baseline to four weeks and baseline to four months were 7.04±30.77 and 15.50±28.13, respectively. VAS pain scores at baseline, four-week, and four-month follow-up were 5.14±2.10, 4.25±2.66, 3.17±2.81. Follow-up scores at four weeks and four months were found to be statistically lower than baseline scores (p=0.006, p=0.003). The average changes from baseline to four weeks and baseline to four months were -1.29±2.29 and -2.44±2.99, respectively. A history of prior corticosteroid injection was not significantly associated with changes in SANE scores at four weeks or four months after PRP injection (p=0.149, p=0.602, respectively). The SANE MCID values at four weeks and four months were 15.39 and 14.07, respectively. Of those patients who reported, 44.4% met the four-week value and 37.5% met the four-month value.Conclusions:Patients after PRP injection for lateral epicondylitis demonstrated increased SANE scores at four months and decreased VAS pain scores at four weeks and four months. The change in SANE scores at four weeks was not statistically significant. These results may indicate that there are greater pain reducing effects as well as milder extremity functionality improvement effects associated with PRP injection. This may be in part due to the inherent nature of the disease with the more prevalent symptom being pain over loss of function. PRP injections are a safe and effective conservative treatment method for reducing pain symptoms and increasing functionality in patients with lateral epicondylitis. Physicians should discuss patient expectations for improvement during the early post-injection period.

Revision shoulder arthroplasty is a technically challenging procedure. It is associated with increased blood loss and operative time, and it frequently necessitates revision implants, augments, and bone-grafting. Shoulder arthroplasty systems with a convertible-platform humeral stem have been developed to reduce the complexity of revision procedures by eliminating the need for humeral component explantation when converting from anatomic shoulder arthroplasty (hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty) to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). A multicenter, retrospective analysis involving 102 consecutive shoulders (102 patients) that underwent revision of an anatomic shoulder arthroplasty to an rTSA was conducted. During the revision, 73 of the shoulders needed exchange of the humeral stem (the exchange group) and 29 had retention of a convertible-platform humeral component (the retention group). Patient demographics, operative time, blood management, range of motion, complications, and patient-reported outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Patients with retention had significantly shorter operative time (mean and standard deviation, 130 ± 48 versus 195 ± 58 minutes; p < 0.001) and lower estimated blood loss (292 ± 118 versus 492 ± 334 mL; p = 0.034). The rate of intraoperative complications was lower in the retention group (0% versus 15%; p = 0.027). Patients with retention had slightly better postoperative range of motion (active external rotation, 26° ± 23° versus 11° ± 23° [p = 0.006]; active forward elevation, 112° ± 37° versus 96° ± 33° [p = 0.055]). Shoulder arthroplasty systems that utilize a convertible-platform humeral stem offer an advantage for rTSA conversion in that a well-fixed, well-positioned humeral stem can be retained. There were significantly fewer complications as well as significantly decreased blood loss and operative time when a convertible-platform stem was utilized (p < 0.050). Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

This study evaluated patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and reinjury rates in patients undergoing meniscal repair with concomitant suture-augmented (SA) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) or repair (ACLr). We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent concomitant meniscus and ACL procedures by a single surgeon between 2015 and 2021. Inclusion criteria were meniscal repair with concomitant SA ACLR or SA ACLr, at least two years of follow-up, and participation in postoperative PROM surveys. Exclusion criteria were concomitant meniscectomy, multiligament repair or reconstruction, or other concomitant procedures at the time of the index operation. After a minimum of two years of follow-up, data was collected on reinjury and patient reported outcome measures, including Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Visual Analog Pain Scale, and Veterans Rand 12 Item Survey (VR-12). 39 total patients were identified, 12 ACL repairs and 27 ACL reconstructions. 6 patients were lost to follow-up, with 10 patients in the ACLr cohort and 23 patients in the ACLR cohort included in the study. Meniscus tear laterality was not significantly different between the cohorts (p = 0.3828). There were two meniscal repair failures in the ACLr cohort compared to one in the ACLR cohort (p = 0.2117). There was one ACL reinjury in the ACLr cohort compared to zero reinjuries in the ACLR cohort (p = 0.3030). In a univariate analysis of PROMs, there were no significant differences in postoperative KOOS (p = 0.3308), VAS (p = 0.9955), SANE (p = 0.3449), VR-12M (p = 0.4705), or VR-12P (p = 0.7903) scores between the cohorts. In a multivariable analysis controlling for age, sex, BMI, meniscus tear laterality, and meniscus tear pattern, choice of ACL procedure was not a significant predictor of any postoperative PROM. 23 total patients, 6 ACL repairs and 17 ACL reconstructions had preoperative data available and were evaluated for changes in PROMs after surgery. There were clinically significant improvements in KOOS and SANE scores in both cohorts postoperatively. In this cohort of patients, meniscal repair with SA ACLr was not inferior to meniscal repair with SA ACLR at two years of follow-up.

Objectives: Rotator cuff tears (RCTs) are the number one cause of shoulder pain and are becoming increasingly common as the population ages. The increasing incidence of RCTs present a significant economic burden, with shoulder pain being the No. 1 cause of disability in the United States. Repair of RCTs, in return, result in a cumulative $3.4 billion savings annually in the United States. Historically, follow-up for rotator cuff repair (RCR) mirrors that of hip and knee arthroplasty, with minimum of 2-year outcomes reported in most peer-reviewed studies. Recent literature, however, demonstrates no significant increase in clinically significant improvement after 6 months regarding functional outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) such as American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), visual analog scale (VAS), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores among others. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate degradation of outcome improvement in patient-reported outcomes after 1-year follow-up of RCR. We hypothesize that there will be no clinically significant increase in Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores after 1 year postoperatively. The primary outcome of interest is change in SANE score over the 2-year episode of care. Methods: All patients that underwent primary RCR within a single health care system were eligible for inclusion in this study. Exclusion criteria included history of surgery on the affected shoulder, incomplete PROs at baseline, 1 year, or 2 years postoperatively, and concomitant fractures about the affected shoulder. Patient demographics, injury characteristics, and operative technical characteristics were obtained through review of the patients’ electronic medical records and operative reports. PROs included SANE, ASES, and VAS scores and were collected prospectively, then stored in a HIPAA-compliant database until reviewed retrospectively for this study. An anchor-based minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated for the study cohort at 1 and 2 years postoperatively and was anchored on a 1-point increase in the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System global 10 quality of life question. The primary outcomes of interest are baseline (preoperative), 1-year, and 2-year SANE scores. Secondary outcomes of interest included rates of symptomatic retear, reoperation, and revision. Statistical analysis was performed with a statistical analysis software (Intellectus). Analyses included descriptive statistics, t tests, chi-square tests of independence, Fischer exact tests, and analyses of variance, as appropriate. Statistical significance was defined as an alpha value of p ≤ 0.05. Results: A total of 495 patients met criteria for inclusion in the study (Table 1). The average age of the study population was 61.5 ± 8.4 years old, and the average body mass index (BMI) was 29.9 ±5.5. Most patients were men (287, 58.0%). A total of 24 patients were under workers’ compensation. Other medical comorbidities of interest included diabetes (74, 15.0%), depression (85, 17.2%), anxiety (74, 15.0%), and rheumatoid arthritis (6, 1.2%). Just over half of patients had chronic tears as described by the surgeon in clinical notes or operative reports (259, 52.3%), and most patients had full-thickness tears documented in the operative report (402, 81.2%). The most common adjuvant procedures included subacromial decompression (SAD) (419, 84.6%), biceps tenodesis (211, 42.6%) and distal clavicle excision (DCE) (133, 26.9%). Baseline SANE scores for the study cohort averaged 40.8 ± 20.3 with a subsequent of 43.4 within the first year postoperatively, bringing the 1-year SANE average to 84.1 ± 196 (p &lt; 0.001). After the 1-year follow-up, however, there was small but statistically significant change in SANE scores with the 2-year SANE scores averaging 87.5 ± 18.1, p &lt; 0.001) (Figure 1). One-year anchor-based MCID for SANE was found to be 45.5, with 238 (48.1%) meeting this MCID. At 2-years, 213 patients (43.0%) met the MCID of 50.6. Conclusions: Over the 2-year episode of care following primary RCR, patients saw an overall increase in SANE of 46.8. Even after the 1-year follow-up, patients continued to see statistically significant increases in SANE scores; however, they did not see clinically significant increase in PROs, as demonstrated by fewer patients meeting the 2-year MCID compared with the 1-year MCID. [Figure: see text]

Objectives: Rotator Cuff Repair (RCR) is frequently associated with treatment of the long head of the biceps brachii tendon. This is because the biceps tendon is a common pain generator of the shoulder, and it is commonly diseased concurrently with the rotator cuff. Biceps tendinopathy is commonly treated with tenodesis (open or arthroscopic) or tenotomy. Previous studies have shown no differences in complication rates and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 2-year follow-up between arthroscopic tenodesis or open tenodesis. Other literature has shown open biceps tenodesis (OBT) to have similar costs and operative time compared to arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (ABT); however, time-driven activity-based costing was not used. The purpose of this study was to evaluate for differences in day of surgery (DOS) costs at one-year for OBT, ABT, and biceps tenotomy in the context of RCR. We hypothesized that cost would be similar between OBT and ABT and would be less for tenotomy. The primary outcome was DOS cost as measured by time-driven activity-based costing. Secondary aims included assessing PROs with the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, as well as operative time, symptomatic retear rate, and reoperation rate at one year. Methods: A prospectively collected PRO database was retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent surgical treatment of their biceps tendon in the setting of primary RCR between 2018 and 2022. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients who underwent supraspinatus or supraspinatus and infraspinatus tendon repair, as well as biceps tenodesis (arthroscopic or open) or tenotomy and had full PRO data at preoperative baseline and at one-year follow up. Patients were excluded if they were missing PRO data, missing cost and implant data, had a prior history of shoulder surgery, underwent revision rotator cuff repair, or had their subscapularis, teres minor, or isolated infraspinatus tendon repaired. A total of 266 patients met criteria. PROs collected included SANE and ASES scores at baseline and one-year follow-up. Patient demographics, injury and surgical characteristics, operative time, retear and reoperation rates, and day of surgery cost were evaluated. Time-driven activity-based costing was used to determine DOS costs. Statistical analyses conducted included descriptive statistics, Fisher exact tests, and analysis of variance. Results: Of the 266 patients that met criteria, approximately half were female (n = 131, 49.3%). Mean patient age at time of surgery was 60.4 years old and mean body mass index was 30.15. Chronic tears were present in 55.6% of patients. 113 patients underwent OBT, 75 underwent ABT, and 78 underwent biceps tenotomy. The average values for ASES and SANE scores at baseline versus 1-year follow-up were 46.9 versus 84.3 and 40.2 versus 84.0, respectively. The age of patients who underwent tenotomy (64.2 years old) was significantly older than the ABT (58.7 years old) and OBT (58.8 years old) groups (p &lt; 0.001). Additionally, more women underwent biceps tenotomy versus tenodesis compared to men (37.4% of women vs. 21.5% of men). Mean operative time was significantly different between the groups with tenotomy being the fastest (ABT 128.0 minutes, OBT 139.9 minutes, tenotomy 121.6 minutes, p &lt; 0.001). DOS costs as well as biceps tendon fixation costs were highest for OBT compared to ABT and biceps tenotomy (DOS $3,963.64 vs. $3,426.67 vs. $3,095.34, p &lt; 0.001, respectively; Biceps fixation $505.25 vs. $237.94 vs. $5.15, p &lt; 0.001, respectively). Additionally, overall implant costs (including RCR) were highest for OBT, despite the number of anchors used not differing between the groups (p = 0.132). There was no difference in the number of tendons repaired by bicep treatment type (p = 0.203). Changes in 1-year ASES and SANE scores were not different between the group (p = 0.221 and p = 0.159, respectively). There were also no differences between groups in rotator cuff symptomatic retears or reoperations (p = 0.731 and p = 0.391, respectively). Conclusions: This study found DOS costs were lowest for biceps tenotomy and highest for OBT with a difference of more than $850. Operative time from shortest for biceps tenotomy, while OBT was associated with an 18 minute longer operative time. Despite the differences in cost and operative time, there were no differences in PROs, symptomatic rotator cuff retear rates, or reoperation rates at one-year follow-up. These results may indicate that all three treatment types can provide patients with similar outcomes; however, lower operative times and costs can be provided by tenotomy or ABT compared to OBT. Surgeons can use these results to help guide technique selection when treating patients with biceps pathology. [Figure: see text]

Anatomic shoulder arthroplasty in patients 40 years or younger

As the volume of shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States continues to increase, the predicted number of revision shoulder arthroplasties grows even higher. Conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has become common. Many commercially available shoulder arthroplasty systems now offer a platform humeral stem that is used for both anatomic shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. This study investigated whether retaining the humeral stem offers advantages over revising the humeral stem in conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The study included 26 patients (mean age, 68.46 years) with failed shoulder arthroplasty who underwent conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean, 34.38 months). Patients who had retention of the humeral stem were compared with those who had stem revision. Humeral stem retention was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (178.92 vs 237 minutes, P=.02). Decreases in blood loss, complications, and length of hospitalization were observed, but the differences were not statistically significant. Minimal differences were observed for patient-reported outcomes. Of patients undergoing humeral stem removal, 21.4% had an intraoperative humeral shaft or tuberosity fracture compared with none in the stem retention group. Humeral stem retention was associated with decreased operative time compared with humeral stem revision in the conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The use of a platform shoulder arthroplasty system may benefit patients with failed shoulder arthroplasty undergoing conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty by avoiding humeral stem revision.

Objectives: Rotator cuff tears are the most common cause of shoulder disability, most commonly affecting the middle-aged population. Treatment for rotator cuff tears has changed dramatically over the past few decades, with overall volume of rotator cuff repairs (RCRs) increasing by approximately 1.6% each year. Simultaneously, there has been a shift from open, inpatient RCR to arthroscopic, outpatient procedures. Currently, well over 75% of patients undergo arthroscopic repair. The two most common techniques for rotator cuff fixation include single- or double-row fixation. Cadaveric and biomechanical studies demonstrate more complete reduction of the rotator cuff to its original footprint with double row repair, with a subsequent increase in anatomic restoration and biomechanical advantage. Many studies regarding clinical and functional outcomes, however, have not consistently demonstrated statistically significant differences between the two. The purpose of this study is to determine differences in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after single- and double-row rotator cuff repairs at one and two years postoperatively. We hypothesize that single-row RCR will have noninferior clinical and patient-reported outcomes when compared to the double-row RCR cohort over the 2-year episode of care. Primary outcomes include baseline, 1-year and 2-year postoperative Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores. Methods: All patients within a single health system that underwent primary rotator cuff repair between 2016 and 2022 were eligible for inclusion in this study. Exclusion criteria included incomplete baseline PROs, involvement of infraspinatus, subscapularis or teres minor tendons, revision surgeries, and concomitant fractures of the shoulder. Demographic information including age, sex, BMI, ASA score, injury characteristics and medical comorbidities were obtained through review of the patients’ electronic medical record. Surgical characteristics and technique were obtained from operative notes. PROs were collected prospectively and stored in a HIPAA-compliant electronic database until retrospective review for this study. Primary outcomes of interest include SANE score at baseline, 1-year and 2-years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes of interest included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global 10 health questionnaire scores, rates of symptomatic retear and reoperation. Statistical analysis included descriptive analyses, paired t-tests, chi-squared test of independence and one-way ANOVA as appropriate. Statistical significance was defined as an alpha value of p ≤ 0.05. Results: A total of 237 patients met criteria for inclusion in this study, the majority of which were female (122, 51.5%). The average BMI was 30.0 ± 5.6, and the average age of the study participants was 59.0 ± 9.4 years. The majority of patients underwent double-row RCR (134, 56.5%). There were no significant differences in age, BMI, ASA score, gender, or smoking status between the two groups (Table 1). There was a higher observed frequency of diabetes mellitus than expected in the double-row cohort, however this did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.066). There was no significant difference in symptomatic retear, revision RCR, and other reoperation rates between the two cohorts (Table 2). The cohort that received double-row repair had a higher observed frequency of full-thickness tears than expected (p &lt;0.001), however there was no significant difference in the observed frequencies of chronic and acute tears between the two cohorts. Baseline ASES scores did not differ significantly between the two cohorts (p = 0.505). Both cohorts saw statistically significant increase in ASES scores from baseline to 1-year (Figure 1). The difference between 1-year and 2-year ASES scores was less than a quarter of the improvement seen in the first year postoperatively, however, was still statistically significant in the double-row cohort and neared statistical significance in the single-row cohort (p = 0.048 and p = 0.075, respectively). While both cohorts saw significant improvement in ASES scores over the 2-year period, there was no significant difference in score change between the two cohorts. The baseline SANE scores were 40.7 ± 20.6 and 43.2 ± 21.4 for the double and single-row cohorts respectively. Each cohort saw statistically significant increases in SANE scores at 1 year postoperatively and continued to see significant increase between 1- and 2-years postoperatively (Figure 1). There was no statistically significant difference between the two cohorts regarding 1- and 2-year change in SANE scores. Conclusions: Over a 2-year period of care after RCR, patients saw significant improvement in SANE and ASES scores, with the majority occurring in the first year postoperatively. There were no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes between patients that underwent double- and single-row repairs. Single- and double-row RCRs perform comparably over a 2-year episode of care, with excellent clinical and patient-reported outcomes. [Figure: see text]

Factors associated with functional improvement after posteriorly augmented total shoulder arthroplasty.

Cemented vs. press-fit humeral stems: a matched cohort analysis at a mean follow-up of 10 years

Postoperative patient-reported outcomes and radiographic findings do not significantly change between 1 and 2 years postoperatively after primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty.

Deficient internal rotation after shoulder arthroplasty can inhibit specific essential activities of daily living that require behind-the-back arm positioning. Although postoperative internal rotation deficits occur, their impact on outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is not well established. Previous authors have validated the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) as a patient-reported assessment of acceptable outcomes of TSA. (1) Is there an association between postoperative internal rotation and acceptable outcomes following TSA as assessed by SANE? (2) Is there a threshold for internal rotation after TSA beyond which increasing internal rotation no longer improves odds of acceptable outcomes? A single institution's longitudinally maintained shoulder arthroplasty registry was used to identify patients undergoing primary anatomic or reverse TSA (RTSA). The registry provides postoperative patient-reported outcomes, including SANE scores. Postoperatively, patients complete a previously validated ROM self-assessment to quantify their current abduction, forward elevation, external rotation in adduction and abduction, and internal rotation in adduction. Data on patient age, preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System mental health scores, gender, surgery performed, and hand dominance were also obtained. In all, 784 patient-reported surveys were available. Thirty-four percent (268 of 784) of the surveys were collected at 1 year, 52% (410 of 784) at 2 years, 11% (87 of 784) at 5 years, and 2% (19 of 784) at 10 years. More than 50% percent (446 of 784) of patients underwent RTSA, 48% were men, and the mean ± SD age was 68 ± 8 years at the time of surgery. A logistic multivariate analysis was used to assess the association of internal rotation with an acceptable outcome (defined as a SANE score of > 75%). A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to assess an internal rotation threshold associated with an acceptable SANE score. After accounting for age, gender, hand dominance, pain level, and surgical procedure, patients with internal rotation below the upper back had lower odds of achieving a SANE score of > 75% (p < 0.05). The threshold for SANE scores > 75% was identified to be internal rotation to the midback and higher, resulting in an area under the curve of 0.71 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.75; p < 0.001) with sensitivity of 57% (95% CI 0.56 to 0.58) and specificity of 75% (95% CI 0.73 to 0.77). After shoulder arthroplasty, shoulder normalcy was associated with postoperative internal rotation. Although our study has not proven a causal relationship between limited internal rotation and poorer SANE scores, our clinical experience combined with these findings suggests that limited internal rotation indeed is likely clinically important in this context, and so addressing postoperative internal rotation deficits, especially for RTSA, may improve the quality of shoulder arthroplasty. Further research is needed to understand the modifiable factors that prevent sufficient internal rotation following shoulder arthroplasty. Level III, therapeutic study.

This study aims to evaluate clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of patients 40 years and older that underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and determine the influence of preexisting arthritis and chondral wear on ACLR outcomes. We hypothesized that patients aged 40+ with ACLR would have excellent clinical outcomes and PROMs regardless of preexisting arthritic changes. A total of 118 patients were included. Patients aged 40 years and older who underwent ACLR in a single healthcare system between 2009 and 2016 were eligible. Outcomes assessed include Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores, intraoperative Outerbridge grading, preoperative Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grading and postoperative complication rates over a 2-year period. Average increase in KOOS and SANE scores were 21.2 19.9 and 23.5 31.3, respectively. Patients with Outerbridge grade III and IV lesions in weight-bearing compartments had lower baseline SANE and KOOS scores than those without (47.1 ± 22.0 vs. 64.5 ± 23.6 baseline SANE and 43.1 ± 18.1 vs. 63.5 ± 15.9 baseline KOOS; p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively) with no significant difference in the amount of change in SANE or KOOS scores (p = 0.111 and p = 0.165 respectively). Patients with KL-grade 2+ osteoarthritis experienced similar changes in KOOS and SANE over the 2-year period to their counterparts (p = 0.598 and p = 0.643, respectively). There is no correlation between preexisting osteoarthritic changes or chondral defects and PROs. KOOS and SANE scores both increased postoperatively. When treating older patients with an ACL tear, surgeons should consider the activity level and desires of the patient as they determine appropriate treatment. Preexisting osteoarthritis does not correlate with patient-reported outcomes for ACLR. Level IV.

Early repair of traumatic rotator cuff tears improves functional outcomes.