Differences In Patient-reported Outcomes Research Articles

Minimum 2-Year Functional Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Capsular Autograft Hip Labral Reconstruction

Background: There is a paucity of literature on arthroscopic capsular autograft labral reconstruction. Purpose: To report midterm functional outcomes for patients undergoing acetabular labral repair with capsular autograft labral reconstruction. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This is a retrospective case series of prospectively collected data on patients who underwent arthroscopic acetabular labral repair by the senior surgeon between March 2013 and August 2018. The inclusion criteria for this study were adult patients aged 18 years or older who underwent primary hip arthroscopy for arthroscopic capsular autograft labral reconstruction. Exclusion criteria were <2 years of postoperative follow-up, elective disenrollment from study before 2-year follow-up, or repeat ipsilateral hip surgery before 2-year follow-up. Intraoperatively, patients underwent capsular autograft hip labral reconstruction if they were found to have a labrum with hypoplastic tissue (width <5 mm), complex tearing, or frank degeneration of native tissue. Clinical outcome data consisted of patient-reported outcome measures. Results: A total of 97 hips (94 patients) met the inclusion criteria with a mean final follow-up of 28.2 months (95% CI, 26.0-30.4). Patients had a mean age of 39.0 years (95% CI, 36.8-41.2) with a mean body mass index of 25.8 (95% CI, 24.9-26.7). When compared with baseline (40.4 [95% CI, 36.7-44.2]), the mean international Hip-Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33) scores were significantly greater at 3-month (60.9 [95% CI, 56.8-64.9]; P < .001), 6-month (68.8 [95% CI, 64.7-72.9]; P < .001), 12-month (73.2 [95% CI, 68.9-77.5]; P < .001), and final (76.6 [95% CI, 72.4-80.8]; P < .001) follow-up. At 2-year follow-up, 76.3%, 65.5%, and 60.8% of patients’ iHOT-33 scores exceeded clinically meaningful outcome thresholds for minimally clinically important difference (MCID), patient-acceptable symptomatic state, and substantial clinical benefit, respectively. Conclusions: In this study of 97 hips undergoing arthroscopic labral repair with capsular autograft labral reconstruction, we found favorable outcomes that exceeded the MCID thresholds in the majority of patients at a mean 28.2 months’ follow-up. Future studies should compare outcomes between this technique and other methods of autograft and allograft reconstruction to determine differences in patient-reported outcomes, donor-site morbidity, and complications.

Regenesorb and polylactic acid hydroxyapatite anchors are associated with similar osseous integration and rotator cuff healing at 2 years.

Commercially available suture anchors for rotator cuff repairs can differ significantly in architecture and material. Clinical data on their osseous integration and its effect on patient-reported outcomes is scarce. Preclinical investigations indicated a higher rate of osseous integration for the open-architecture design of the Healicoil Regenesorb anchor than the closed-threaded design of the Twinfix (Smith & Nephew). The purpose of this study was to investigate these 2 anchors with different architecture and material to determine their effect on osseous integration and clinical outcomes after rotator cuff repair. A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed from 2014 to 2019. Sixty-four patients (39 females, 25 males) with an average age of 58.7 years who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by one of 4 board-certified, fellowship-trained surgeons were randomized to receive Healicoil Regenesorb (PLGA/ß-TCP/Calcium Sulfate) or Twinfix Ultra HA (PLLA/HA) anchors. Thirty-two patients had Healicoil anchors implanted, and 32 patients had Twinfix anchors implanted. Of the 64 patients, 51 returned at 24 months for computed tomographic (CT) examination (25 Twinfix and 26 Healicoil) to determine osteointegration of the anchors. Patient-reported outcomes, including Penn Shoulder Score (PENN), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, visual analog scale, EQ-5D, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Global Rating of Change, were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Ultrasonography was used to assess rotator cuff integrity after 6 months. Two board-certified, fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons, blinded to the type of anchors, analyzed the CT scans to assess the anchor osteointegration at 24 months using a previously published grading scale. There were no differences in demographics, preoperative outcomes, or baseline characteristics such as tear size, number of anchors, Goutallier classification, or smoking status between groups. There was no difference in osseous integration between the 2 anchors at 24 months (P = .117). Eight patients had rotator cuff retears, of which 2 patients had Twinfix anchors and 6 patients had Healicoil anchors (P = .18). There were no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes or complications between groups. The 2-year PENN scores were 89 with the Twinfix and 88 with Healicoil anchors (P = .55). Despite differences in material and anchor architecture, the rate of healing and patient-reported outcomes were similar between the Twinfix and Healicoil anchor groups. The rate of osteointegration was the same at 2 years.

Patient-reported outcome improvements at 24-month follow-up after fusion added to decompression for grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a multicenter study using the Quality Outcomes Database.

The ideal surgical management of grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis has not been determined despite extensive prior investigations. In this cohort study, the authors used data from the large, multicenter, prospectively collected Quality Outcomes Database to bridge the gap between the findings in previous randomized trials and those in a more heterogeneous population treated in a typical practice. The objective was to assess the difference in patient-reported outcomes among patients undergoing decompression alone or decompression plus fusion. The primary outcome measure was change in 24-month Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in ODI score change and 30% change in ODI score at 24 months were also evaluated. After adjusting for patient-specific and clinical factors, multivariable linear and logistic regressions were employed to evaluate the impact of fusion on outcomes. To account for differences in age, sex, body mass index, and baseline listhesis, a sensitivity analysis was performed using propensity score analysis to match patients undergoing decompression only with those undergoing decompression and fusion. In total, 608 patients who had grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis were identified (85.5% with at least 24 months of follow-up); 140 (23.0%) underwent decompression alone and 468 (77.0%) underwent decompression and fusion. The 24-month change in ODI score was significantly greater in the fusion plus decompression group than in the decompression-only group (-25.8 ± 20.0 vs -15.2 ± 19.8, p < 0.001). Fusion remained independently associated with 24-month ODI score change (B = -7.05, 95% CI -10.70 to -3.39, p ≤ 0.001) in multivariable regression analysis, as well as with achieving the MCID for the ODI score (OR 1.767, 95% CI 1.058-2.944, p = 0.029) and 30% change in ODI score (OR 2.371, 95% CI 1.286-4.371, p = 0.005). Propensity score analysis resulted in 94 patients in the decompression-only group matched 1 to 1 with 94 patients in the fusion group. The addition of fusion to decompression remained a significant predictor of 24-month change in the ODI score (B = 2.796, 95% CI 2.228-13.275, p = 0.006) and of achieving the 24-month MCID ODI score (OR 2.898, 95% CI 1.214-6.914, p = 0.016) and 24-month 30% change in ODI score (OR 2.300, 95% CI 1.014-5.216, p = 0.046). These results suggest that decompression plus fusion in patients with grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis may be associated with superior outcomes at 24 months compared with decompression alone, both in reduction of disability and in achieving clinically meaningful improvement. Longer-term follow-up is warranted to assess whether this effect is sustained.

The Impact of Coronal Plane Deformity on Ankle Arthrodesis and Arthroplasty.

Ankle coronal plane deformity represents a complex 3-dimensional problem, and comparative data are lacking to guide treatment recommendations for optimal treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis with concomitant coronal plane deformity. In total, 224 patients treated for end-stage ankle arthritis were enrolled in an observational trial. Of 112 patients followed more than 2 years, 48 patients (19 arthrodesis, 29 arthroplasty) had coronal plane deformity and were compared to 64 patients without coronal plane deformity (18 arthrodesis, 46 arthroplasty) defined as greater than 10 degrees of varus or valgus. The arthroplasty implants used had different internal constraints to intracomponent coronal plane tilting. Patients completed Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (MFA) and SF-36 preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. Measures included change in SF-36 and MFA, as well as compared reoperation rates and pain scales. For the groups with coronal plane ankle deformity, the median for the arthrodesis group was 19.0 degrees and the median for the arthroplasty group was 16.9 degrees. In the deformity cohort during the follow-up period, we had 7 major reoperations: 2 in the arthrodesis group and 5 in the arthroplasty group, all with the less constrained implant design. MFA, vitality, and social function of the SF-36 improved for all groups. Patients without preoperative deformities had greater improvement with fusion or replacement at both 2 and 3 years. There was no difference in improvement between those patients with coronal deformity who received arthroplasty vs arthrodesis. Patients with and without coronal plane deformity may benefit from ankle arthroplasty and arthrodesis, although greater improvements may be expected in those without preoperative deformity. In this study, at final follow-up of 3 years, overall we found no meaningful difference in patient-reported outcomes between the patients with preoperative coronal plane deformities whether they had a fusion or a replacement as treatment for end-stage ankle arthritis. Level II, comparative study.

Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction for Adolescents With Acute First-Time Patellar Dislocation With an Associated Loose Body

Background: The management of adolescents with acute first-time patellar dislocation with an associated loose body remains a debated topic. The rate of recurrent dislocation in these patients may be up to 61% if the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) is repaired or not addressed surgically. To our knowledge, a prospective evaluation of MPFL reconstruction for adolescents with acute first-time patellar dislocation with an associated chondral or osteochondral loose body has not been previously performed. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to analyze patients with a first-time patellar dislocation who required surgery for a loose body, comparing those who underwent MPFL repair or no treatment with those who underwent MPFL reconstruction during the index procedure. The hypothesis was that performing MPFL reconstruction would reduce the rate of recurrent instability and improve patient-reported outcomes compared with MPFL repair or no treatment. A secondary objective was to report outcomes of those patients who underwent reconstruction versus those who did not. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This was a prospective analysis of adolescents treated with MPFL reconstruction for acute first-time patellar dislocation with associated loose bodies between 2015 and 2017 at a single pediatric level 1 trauma center with minimum 2-year follow-up. Retrospective analysis was previously performed for a similar cohort of adolescents treated with MPFL repair or no treatment. Patient characteristic data, radiographic measurements, and surgical variables were compared. Primary outcome measures included recurrent subluxation or dislocation and the need for further stabilization procedures. Secondary outcomes included Kujala score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, patient satisfaction, and ability to return to sport. Results: A total of 76 patients were included, 30 in the MPFL reconstruction cohort and 46 in the MPFL repair or no-treatment cohort. The only difference noted in patient characteristic, radiographic, or surgical variables was a smaller Insall-Salvati ratio in the reconstruction group (1.29 vs 1.42; P = .011). Compared with MPFL repair or no treatment, MPFL reconstruction was associated with less recurrent instability (10.0% vs 58.7%; P < .001), fewer secondary procedures (6.7% vs 47.8%; P < .001), and more frequent return to sports (66.7% vs 39.1%; P = .003). No differences in patient-reported outcomes were noted. Conclusion: Performing concomitant MPFL reconstruction in adolescents with first-time patellar dislocation and an intra-articular loose body results in a 5-fold reduction in recurrent instability, reduces the need for subsequent surgery, and improves patients’ ability to return to sports compared with repairing or not treating the MPFL.

No Difference in Outcomes Following Osteochondral Allograft with Fresh Precut Cores Compared to Hemi-Condylar Allografts.

The purpose of the current study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes at early to midterm follow-up between fresh precut cores versus hemi-condylar osteochondral allograft (OCAs) in the treatment of symptomatic osteochondral lesions. A retrospective review of patients who underwent an OCA was performed. Patient matching between those with OCA harvested from an allograft condyle/patella or a fresh precut allograft core was performed to generate 2 comparable groups. The cartilage at the graft site was assessed with use of a modified Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) scoring system and patient-reported outcomes were collected. Overall, 52 total patients who underwent OCA with either fresh precut OCA cores (n = 26) and hemi-condylar OCA (n = 26) were pair matched at a mean follow-up of 34.0 months (range 12 months to 99 months). The mean ages were 31.5 ± 10.7 for fresh precut cores and 30.9 ± 9.8 for hemi-condylar (P = 0.673). Males accounted for 36.4% of the overall cohort, and the mean lesion size for fresh precut OCA core was 19.6 mm2 compared to 21.2 mm2 for whole condyle (P = 0.178). There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes including Visual Analogue Scale, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement, and Tegner (P > 0.5 for each), or in MOCART score (69.2 vs. 68.3, P = 0.93). This study found that there was no difference in patient-reported clinical outcomes or MOCART scores following OCA implantation using fresh precut OCA cores or size matched condylar grafts at early to midterm follow-up.

Telescoping screw fixation compared to traditional in situ screw fixation for slipped capital femoral epiphysis: clinical, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes.

This study compares clinical, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes among telescoping and traditional screws for the treatment of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). We hypothesized that telescoping screws would prevent slip progression and result in preserved femoral neck growth and improved patient-reported outcomes. Traditional screws were compared to telescoping screws in a 2:1 matched cohort based on age at initial surgery, length of radiographic follow-up and whether or not the hip was pinned prophylactically or as a treatment for SCFE. Neck length and telescoping screw length were measured. The patient-reported outcomes were obtained at routine clinic visits. Total 42 hips were included with a mean follow-up of 24.5 ± 3.3 months. No patients developed avascular necrosis, chondrolysis or needed revision surgical procedures. Telescoping screws increased in length for the entire cohort by a mean of 6.0 ± 4.3 mm. Neck length change was not different in SCFE hips when treated with traditional screws vs. telescoping screws (P = 0.527). However, there was a difference in neck length change between the two groups when comparing prophylactically treated hips (P = 0.001). There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes among hips treated with telescoping screws compared to traditional screws. Traditional and telescoping screws are both effective for the treatment of SCFE. Telescoping screws have an advantage when prophylactically treating hips that are at risk of slipping as they don't lead to the coxa breva that is seen with traditional screws. However, both treatment methods had similar patient-reported outcomes.

A Hybrid Virtual Fracture Clinic is Safe and Efficacious in the COVID-19 Era: Stay at Home and Save Lives.

IntroductionThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated a change in the manner outpatient fracture clinics are conducted due to the need to reduce footfall in hospitals. While studies regarding virtual fracture clinics have shown these to be useful and effective, they focus exclusively on remote consultations. However, our service was bespoke to the patient - either a face-to-face, a telephone consultation or both, depending on patient need - a ‘hybrid virtual fracture clinic' (HVFC). We report patient satisfaction and outcomes with this service from the first wave of the pandemic.MethodsWe retrospectively interviewed patients who availed of the HVFC service at our institution during the first two weeks of national lockdown in England from March 23 to April 5, 2020. The number and type of consultations, patient vulnerability to COVID-19, and type of management (surgical vs non-surgical) were among the factors taken into consideration. Patient experience was assessed using the Net Promoter Score (NPS), Customer Effort Score (CES), and Customer Satisfaction Score (CSS) on a scale of 0-10. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the EuroQol-5D-5L score (including EQ Visual Analogue Scale {EQ-VAS} scoring on a scale of 0-100).ResultsThe mean overall NPS, CES, and CSS for the service were 7.32, 7.24, and 7.49, respectively. The mean self-reported EQ-VAS rating was 77.5. Of 442 consultations, 246 were conducted virtually; 10% were face-to-face, 29% virtual, and 61% were hybrid consultations.The HVFC resulted in a 55.65% reduction in footfall. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference across any outcome measure when compared between hybrid, virtual, and face-to-face consultations. Patients vulnerable to COVID-19 and those who did not require surgery tended to report better overall scores.ConclusionOur study indicates that the HVFC format can reduce patient footfall significantly (>50%) while providing effective and satisfactory outpatient care. There appears to be no difference in patient-reported outcomes between face-to-face consultations and hybrid or virtual consultations. Patients would recommend HVFC to family and friends, found it was easy to use, and reported good satisfaction with the service.

Randomized Trial of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff With or Without Acromioplasty: No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes at Long-Term Follow-Up

To evaluate long-term patient-reported outcomes and revision surgery after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with or without acromioplasty.Between 2007 and 2011, prospectively enrolled patients undergoing arthroscopic repair for full-thickness rotator cuff tears, with any acromial morphology, were randomized into either acromioplasty or nonacromioplasty groups. Patients with revision surgery, subscapularis involvement, advanced neurologic conditions, or death were excluded. Baseline and long-term follow-up questionnaires, including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, and Constant scores were obtained. Rates of symptomatic retear, revision rotator cuff surgery, or secondary reoperation were recorded. Averages with standard deviation were calculated, and t-tests were used to compare outcomes of interest between cohorts.In total, 69 of 90 patients (76.7%) were available at 92.4 months (± 10.5). There were 23 of 32 patients in the acromioplasty cohort and 24 of 37 patients in the nonacromioplasty cohort. Mean age for the nonacromioplasty cohort was 56.9 (± 7.6) years, whereas acromioplasty was 59.6 (± 6.8) years. Comparison of baseline demographics and intraoperative information revealed no significant differences, including age, sex, Workers' Compensation, acute mechanism of injury, tear size, degree of retraction, and surgical technique (e.g., single- vs. double-row). At final follow-up, there were no statistically significant differences according to ASES (P = .33), VAS pain (P = 0.79), Constant (P = .17), SST (P = .05), UCLA (P = .19), and Short Form-12 (SF-12) (P = .79) in patients with and without acromioplasty. Two patients with acromioplasty (5.6%) and 3 patients without acromioplasty (9.1%) sustained atraumatic recurrent rotator cuff tear with secondary repair (P = .99), and there was no significant difference in retear rates or patient-reported outcome measures by acromial morphology.This randomized trial, with mean 7.5-year follow-up, found no difference in validated patient-reported outcomes, retear rate, or revision surgery rate between patients undergoing rotator cuff repair with or without acromioplasty.II, prospective randomized controlled trial.

Revision Rotator Cuff Repair Versus Primary Repair for Large to Massive Tears Involving the Posterosuperior Cuff: Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes.

Background:The retear rate after revision rotator cuff repair (rRCR) ranges from 50% to 90%. Patients who undergo primary RCR (pRCR) for large to massive rotator cuff tear (mRCT) also have unpredictable outcomes.Purpose:To compare the clinical outcomes after rRCR for a posterosuperior rotator cuff tear of any size with those after pRCR for mRCT and to identify the risk factors for poor outcomes and retear after rRCR.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:Among patients with posterosuperior cuff tear treated between 2010 and 2017, the clinical outcomes of 46 patients who underwent rRCR were compared with 106 patients who underwent pRCR for mRCT. Between-group differences in patient-reported outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, VAS for satisfaction and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] and Constant scores) at final follow-up were evaluated and compared with previously published minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values. Radiological outcomes were evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasonography at a minimum 1-year follow-up. Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to identify the risk factors for poor ASES score, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to assess the risk factors for retear after rRCR.Results:The mean follow-up was 26.4 months (range, 24-81 months). Although final VAS for pain, VAS for satisfaction, and ASES scores in the rRCR group were significantly worse than those in the pRCR group, the Constant score was similar between the groups. These differences in outcomes did not exceed the MCID threshold. The retear rate in the rRCR group was 50% compared with 39% for the pRCR group (P = .194). In the rRCR group, risk factors for worse ASES score were retear (P = .043; r = –11.3), lower body mass index (P = .032; r = 1.9), and lower preoperative VAS for pain (P = .038; r = 2.3), and risk factors for retear were preoperative high-grade fatty degeneration (Goutallier grades 3 and 4) of the supraspinatus muscle (P = .026; odds ratio, 5.2) and serum hyperlipidemia (P = .035; odds ratio, 11.8).Conclusion:Both study groups had similar clinical and radiological outcomes. Patients with symptomatic failed rotator cuff repairs having high-grade fatty degeneration of the supraspinatus muscle and/or serum hyperlipidemia had a greater likelihood of retear after rRCR.

Outcome Measures and Quality of Life in Vestibular Schwannomas

This review summarizes existing vestibular schwannoma (VS) disease-specific and non-disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) tools for quality of life (QoL) and audio-vestibular symptoms, compares QoL across treatment modalities, and discusses the potential role of psychological variables in QoL and recovery after surgical resection of VS. VS treatment success was previously assessed according to various factors such as the extent of tumor resection, facial nerve function, and hearing preservation. However, the literature demonstrates recent shifts away from using such physician-reported “objective” outcomes as benchmarks for success towards more patient-perceived “subjective” measures. A number of PROM tools have been developed to assess QoL and other measures in patients with VS. This has allowed us to better understand and quantify the impact of the disease and of the treatments on our patient population. However, there are important considerations to be made when applying PROM in clinical settings such as understanding the concept of Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID). The use of disease-specific PROMs, such as the PANQOL, as a primary outcome in VS research is encouraged. When doing so, PROM scales should incorporate the concept of MCID to distinguish statistically significant from clinically significant findings and should further investigate the role of non-medical variables, such as psychological variables, on QoL and recovery trajectories in patients with VS. Actual literature does not seem to indicate a clinically significant difference in patient-reported outcomes among treatment modalities.

Effect of sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft vs vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension on treatment failure in women with uterovaginal prolapse: 5-year results of a randomized clinical trial

Vaginal hysterectomy with suture apical suspension is commonly performed for uterovaginal prolapse. Sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft (vaginal mesh hysteropexy) is an alternative, although in 2019 the Food and Drug Administration removed this mesh product from the United States market. Our objective was to compare the efficacy and adverse events of these 2 procedures. At 9 clinical sites in the United States National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Pelvic Floor Disorders Network, 183 postmenopausal women requesting vaginal surgery for symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse were enrolled in a multisite randomized superiority clinical trial, comparing a sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft (hysteropexy) with a vaginal hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament suspension (hysterectomy). Participants consented to remain masked to treatment assignment for the study duration. Study visits were conducted at 6-month intervals through 60 months. The primary treatment failure composite outcome (retreatment of prolapse, prolapse beyond the hymen, or prolapse symptoms) was evaluated with survival modeling. Secondary outcomes included complications or adverse events, individual anatomic measures of the pelvic organ prolapse quantification examination, and presence, severity, and impact and bother of prolapse, urinary, bowel, and pain symptoms as measured by validated questionnaires. The 3-year published results suggested better primary outcomes with sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft, but the differences were not statistically significant (P=.06). This study reports the 5-year outcomes. A total of 183 women with a mean age of 66 years were randomized between April 2013 and February 2015; 93 were randomized to hysteropexy and 90 were randomized to hysterectomy. Notably, 175 were included in the trial, and 156 (89%) completed the 5-year follow-up. The primary outcome showed fewer failures for hysteropexy than hysterectomy through 5 years (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.94; P=.03), with failure rates of 37% vs 54%, respectively, resulting in a difference of-18% (95% confidence interval,-33% to-3%) at 5 years. With the exception of the Urogenital Distress Inventory, no group differences were demonstrated in patient-reported pelvic floor symptoms, prolapse symptoms, bowel function symptoms, general quality of life, body image, or pelvic pain. At their last visit through 5 years, 70% of participants (129 of 183) reported they remained masked to their treatment with no difference in masking between groups. Adverse events for hysteropexy vs hysterectomy included mesh exposure (8% vs 0%), granulation tissue after 12 weeks (1% vs 12%), and suture exposure after 12 weeks (3% vs 21%), respectively. Among women with symptomatic uterovaginal prolapse undergoing vaginal surgery, sacrospinous hysteropexy with graft resulted in a lower composite failure rate than vaginal hysterectomy through 5 years. There were no meaningful differences in patient-reported outcomes between groups. Our results suggest that this vaginal mesh hysteropexy procedure should be made available to patients.

Comparisons of initial outcomes and cost-effectiveness after total ankle arthroplasty versus bipolar osteochondral allograft transplantation in the ankle: a retrospective cohort study

Background: Total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) has been a standard-of-care surgical treatment option for patients who are suffering from ankle disorders since the 1960s. It is costly with a limited lifespan; younger, active patients will likely need additional surgeries. Evidence-based advancements in osteochondral allograft (OCA) preservation and transplantation techniques have resulted in improved outcomes, making it a potentially more appropriate treatment option for specific patients. This study compares 90-day clinical and self-reported outcomes for patients who received TAA or bipolar OCA ankle transplantation. Methods: Differences in costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) for patients were determined using postoperative 1-year follow-up. An institutional review board-approved review of electronic medical records and billing data was conducted for patients who underwent TAA or bipolar OCA ankle transplantation (n=35) at a single institution between 2014 and 2018. Postoperative patient-reported outcome scores and cost comparisons were completed using a two-sample t-test, or nonparametric alternative, or chi-square test. Results: Three months after surgery, no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes, postsurgical complications, or value-based care metrics were observed between older TAA (n=18) or younger OCA groups (n=17). Based on data, OCA and TAA were both considered cost-effective treatment options; differences in the incremental cost-effectiveness between OCA and TAA were not statistically significant (P=0.99), and 1-year outcomes were good to excellent. Conclusions: These results will guide more robust planning for 90-day postoperative reimbursement guidelines. Ongoing work is needed to assess mid-term and long-term outcomes for patients with respect to morbidity, complications, patient-reported outcomes, costs, and QALY. Level of Clinical Evidence: Level III.

Ibuprofen Use Did Not Affect Outcome Metrics After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair,

PurposeTo determine whether patients who are prescribed ibuprofen after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair have significantly different patient-reported outcomes for pain, function, and overall health at baseline and 1 and 2 years after operation relative to patients only prescribed opioids.MethodsPatients who underwent a rotator cuff repair by a total of 3 surgeons and participated in the outcomes registry from 2012 to 2016 were screened for inclusion in this study. Inclusion criteria were primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, at least 2 years from the date of surgery and over the age of 18. Exclusion criteria were revision and open rotator cuff repair. All patients followed the standard postoperative rehabilitation protocol for rotator cuff repair. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts. Group I included patients who received ibuprofen/nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents (NSAID) after surgery (n = 281), and Group II consisted of patients who did not receive ibuprofen/NSAID after surgery (n = 182). Patient-reported outcome measures for Visual Analogue Scale, American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, Simple Shoulder Test and The Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey were collected preoperatively and at 3 and 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery. Statistical analysis was performed to compare patient-reported outcome measures between Group I and II.ResultsThis study consisted of 463 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and patients were divided into 2 cohorts. There were 281 patients who did not receive ibuprofen/NSAID after operation in Group I and 182 patients who did receive ibuprofen in Group II. There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in age at treatment, mean body mass index, gender, ethnicity, diabetes, and number of rotator cuff tendons involved; however, there was a statistically significant difference in receiving worker’s compensation (P = .005), and this was subsequently adjusted for in our analysis. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes for all metrics between the group prescribed ibuprofen and the group that was not prescribed ibuprofen at 1 and 2 years after surgery or in change from baseline.ConclusionPatients receiving ibuprofen did as well as patients who did not receive ibuprofen after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair on patient-reported outcome measures assessing shoulder pain, function, and overall health.Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.

Reoperations after decompression with or without fusion for L4–5 spinal stenosis with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis: a study of 6,532 patients in Swespine, the national Swedish spine register

Background and purpose — There are different opinions on how to surgically address lumbar spinal stenosis with concomitant degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). We investigated reoperation rates at the index and adjacent levels after L4–5 fusion surgery in a large cohort of unselected patients registered in Swespine, the national Swedish spine register. Patients and methods — 6,532 patients, who underwent surgery for L4–5 spinal stenosis with or without DS between 2007 and 2012, were followed up to 2017 to identify reoperations at the index and adjacent levels. The reoperation rates for decompression and fusion were compared with the reoperation rates for decompression only and for patients with or without DS. Patient-reported outcome data were collected preoperatively, and at 1 and 2 years after surgery and used to evaluate differences in outcome between index operations and reoperations. Results — For spinal stenosis with DS, the reoperation rate at the index level was 3.0% for decompression and fusion and 6.0% for decompression only. At the adjacent level, the corresponding numbers were 9.7% and 4.2% respectively. For spinal stenosis without DS, the reoperation rate at the index level was 3.7% for decompression and fusion and 6.2% after decompression only. At the adjacent level, the corresponding numbers were 8.1% and 3.8% respectively. For the reoperations at the adjacent level, there was no difference in patient-reported outcome between extended fusion or decompression only. Interpretation — Single-level lumbar fusion surgery is associated with an increased rate of reoperations at the adjacent level compared with decompression only. When reoperations at the index level are included there is no difference in reoperation rates between fusion and decompression only.

Longer Term Outcomes Following High Tibial Osteotomy for Osteoarthritis: A Prospective, Multi-Centre Observational Study Comparing Tomofix and OPTY-LINE Devices.

Assessing surgical accuracy and patient-recorded outcome measures for patients fitted with either the OPTY-LINE intramedullary realignment system or the Tomofix plate for medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO). Two matched case series of patients with symptomatic medial compartment osteoarthritis without other significant knee pathology. One group comprised of 19 patients receiving the Tomofix plate, whereas another comprised of 12 patients receiving the OPTY-LINE intramedullary nail. Patella-centred long leg alignment radiographs were assessed to calculate surgical accuracy in all cases. Patients completed knee injury osteoarthritis outcome scores (KOOS) and osteotomy surgery patient satisfaction questionnaires pre-operatively and at 24months post-surgery. Absolute surgical accuracy at 2years post-surgery was a mean 4.2 [standard deviation 3.7] for OPTY-LINE versus 9.2 [SD 7.8] for Tomofix (p = 0.11, Mann-Whitney U test). On average, patients in either the OPTY-LINE or Tomofix cohort reported at least a minimal perceptible clinical improvement-minimum average improvement of 15-for all five KOOS themes. No significant difference in change of KOOS scores over time or patient satisfaction levels were observed between the two cohorts. The OPTY-LINE device for HTO performs to a similar level as the Tomofix device. Surgical accuracy data are promising for OPTY-LINE, but does not seem to readily translate into difference in patient-reported outcomes compared to Tomofix. Even longer follow-up periods, to measure survival rates, and true randomised trials on larger samples can elucidate if there is a benefit for using one device over the other.

What’s New in Hand and Wrist Surgery

What’s New in Hand and Wrist Surgery

Difference in patient-reported outcomes of various patellar component designs in total knee arthroplasty: A randomized clinical study.

This study investigated the clinical effects of different patellar components without being affected by the femoral component design in total knee arthritis (TKA) for patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). In total, 48 patients with OA who met the criteria of the American College of Rheumatology for OA were enrolled and randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to two groups according to the usage of patellar component design for TKA (medialized dome type [dome group] or medialized anatomic type [anatomic group]). To evaluate the clinical outcomes for TKA, knee range of motion (ROM), pain intensity of 0-100 mm visual analog scale (pain VAS), and the Japanese Knee Osteoarthritis Measure (JKOM) score were obtained at baseline and year 1. The difference in knee ROM, pain VAS, or total JKOM score at year 1 was not significant between the dome and anatomic groups (p = 0.398, 0.733 and 0.536, respectively). Moreover, similar results were obtained for changes in knee ROM, pain VAS, or total JKOM scores from baseline. In both groups, the pain VAS and total JKOM scores were significantly improved at year 1. Both dome and anatomic groups in TKA are significantly effective for pain and function using the JKOM score. However, their efficacy did not differ, according to the JKOM score. Results of this study are rare information focusing on the patellar component design and provide one of the insights into the TKA clinical management.

Arthroscopically Assisted Internal Fixation of Foot and Ankle Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Background:Patients undergoing fixation for foot and ankle fractures may experience poor outcomes despite achieving apparent anatomic reduction. Adjunct arthroscopy to identify missed concomitant injuries and subtle displacements has been proposed as a vehicle to enhance functional results for these patients. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the literature regarding arthroscopically assisted open reduction and internal fixation (AAORIF) methods for commonly encountered foot and ankle injuries including pilon, ankle, and calcaneus fractures published to date.Methods:A systematic review of the literature was performed using the PubMed database to access all studies reporting on arthroscopically assisted internal fixation methods for pilon, ankle, and calcaneus fractures. Relevant publications were analyzed for details on their respective study designs, the operative technique used, clinical outcomes, outcome instruments used, and reported complications.Results:A total of 32 studies were included in this review. Two studies on pilon fractures, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and case series with a total of 243 patients, met inclusion criteria. Postoperative articular reductions, bone union, and Mazur scores were found to be significantly better for those using adjunct arthroscopy when compared to those with no arthroscopy use. Patient-reported outcomes were overall reported as excellent for most patients, with no difference in patient-reported outcomes reported in the RCT. For ankle fractures, a total of 17 studies comprising of 2 systematic reviews, 1 meta-analysis, 2 RCTs, 5 retrospective comparative studies, 6 case series, and 1 case-control study met inclusion criteria for this review. Results were mixed, though the overall consensus was that arthroscopy use may help to better visualize concomitant intra-articular injuries and is generally considered safe with at least comparable outcomes to conventional methods. For the calcaneus, 13 studies met the criteria. Two studies were review papers, 8 were case series, and 3 were retrospective comparative studies. A total of 308 patients with 316 fractures formed the basis of analysis. In general, the studies found comparable functional outcomes between with or without arthroscopy use, but found that anatomical reductions were significantly improved with the use of arthroscopy.Conclusions:Arthroscopy shows promise as a valuable adjunct tool for internal fixation of foot and ankle fractures, though definitive conclusions as to its clinical significance have yet to be drawn because of limited evidence. Potential advantages related to the direct visualization of the fracture site and minimally invasive nature of arthroscopy were suggested throughout studies examined in this review. The presence of intra-articular pathology may lead to unexpectedly poor outcomes seen in some patients who undergo surgical fixation of ankle fractures with an otherwise anatomic reduction on postoperative radiographs; the ability to diagnose and address these lesions with arthroscopy, therefore, has the potential to improve patient outcomes. To date, however, available literature has not shown that significant improvements in anatomical reductions and treatment of these intra-articular injuries provide any improvement in outcomes over standard fixation methods. Few prospective randomized controlled studies have been performed comparing these 2 operative techniques, rendering any suggestion that AAORIF improves clinical outcomes over traditional open fixation difficult to justify. Further research is indicated for what may be a potentially promising surgical adjunct prior to advocating for its routine use in patients.

Does Robot Navigation and Intraoperative Computed Tomography Guidance Help with Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy? A Match-Paired Study

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (rPELD) using a specially designed orthopaedic robot with an intraoperative computed tomography-equipped suite for treatment of symptomatic lumbar disc herniation and compare rPELD with fluoroscopy-assisted percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (fPELD). We retrospectively reviewed and compared demographic data, radiologic workups, and patient-reported outcomes of 39 patients treated with rPELD and 78 patients treated with fPELD at our institution between January 2019 and December2019. Our data showed that a single-shot puncture in the rPELD group was significantly more precise compared with 4.12 ± 1.71 trials in the fPELD group (P<0.001). There was an overall reduction of fluoroscopy (21.33 ± 3.89 times vs. 33.06 ± 2.92 times, P < 0.001), puncture-channel time (13.34 ± 3.03 minutes vs. 15.03 ± 4.5 minutes, P= 0.038), and total operative time (57.46 ± 7.49 minutes vs. 69.40 ± 12.59 minutes, P < 0.001) using the rPELD technique versus the fPELD technique. However, there were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes, length of hospital stay, and complication rate between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Taken together, our data indicate that rPELD provides a precise skin entry point and optimal trajectory for puncture, which increases the success rate of PELD, negating the need for revision surgery. However, further studies are required to confirm the superiority and application of the rPELD technique.