Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery最新文献

Purpose: To investigate the impact of social determinants of health (SDOH) disparities on 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, 90-day postoperative complications, and five-year secondary surgery rates after primary hip arthroscopy using a large national database.

Methods: A national administrative claims database was used to identify patients who underwent primary hip arthroscopy with femoroplasty, acetabuloplasty, and/or labral repair between 2015 and 2022. Patients were queried for whether they experienced any SDOH disparities, including economic, educational, environmental, or social disparities; those experiencing SDOH within 1 year prior to primary hip arthroscopy were matched 1:1 by age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index score, diabetes, obesity, and tobacco use to patients not experiencing any lifetime SDOH disparities. Odds of 90-day complications and 30-day ED visits were compared using multivariable logistic regression. Rates of five-year revision hip arthroscopy and of any secondary surgery (revision hip arthroscopy or total hip arthroplasty) were compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

Results: A total of 3,383 primary hip arthroscopy patients who experienced SDOH disparities were matched 1:1 to a control cohort of 3,383 patients who had not experienced SDOH (age, 41.0 years, 79.6% female, for both cohorts). Odds of adverse events following arthroscopy were low and not different between cohorts (SDOH: 1.51%, vs. No SDOH: 1.57%; P=0.09). Additionally, there was no difference in odds of 30-day ED visits (SDOH: 5.65%, vs. No SDOH: 4.79%; P=0.10). The rate of five-year revision hip arthroscopy was significantly greater among patients experiencing SDOH disparities (5.4% vs. 4.1%; P=0.02); however, there was no difference in rates of any secondary surgery between cohorts (11.8% vs. 10.4%; P=0.10).

Conclusion: Patients experiencing SDOH disparities had similar odds of postoperative complications and ED visits after primary hip arthroscopy but greater rates of five-year revision hip arthroscopy compared to a matched-control cohort of patients not experiencing SDOH disparities.

Level of evidence: 3; retrospective case-control study.

Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of the arthroscopic autologous iliac crest grafting (AICG) procedure with an adjustable-loop suspensory fixation device in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability (ASI) with glenoid bone defects.

Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on the patients who underwent arthroscopic AICG with an adjustable-loop suspensory fixation device from January 2017 to December 2020. Patients with traumatic ASI, significant glenoid bone defects, and a minimum follow-up of 24 months were included. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS), the Rowe score, the Walch-Duplay score, the Constant score, and the Visual Analogue Score (VAS), were compared preoperatively and postoperatively. Radiological assessments using computed tomography (CT) were performed before and after the procedure. Additional data on active range of motion, recurrence events, and complications were recorded.

Results: A total of 42 patients were included in the study, with a mean follow-up time of 35.2 months ranging from 25.1 to 55.9 months. Mean preoperative OSIS, Rowe score, Walch-Duplay score, and Constant score significantly improved from 24.4±7.2, 25.0±9.0, 25.2±9.8, 87.5±7.1 to 42.4±4.9, 92.4±8.1, 87.9±8.3, 93.6±4.5 at the last follow-up, respectively. All patients exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for OSIS, Rowe, and Walch-Duplay scores. The graft union rate was 100%, and the glenoid area increased significantly from 82.5% preoperatively to 100.1% at the final follow-up. No patient experienced a recurrence of instability. Two recorded complications included one case of dysesthesia around the donor site and one case of postoperative shoulder stiffness.

Conclusions: The outcomes of the arthroscopic AICG procedure, which utilizes an adjustable-loop suspensory fixation device, demonstrated stable bone graft fixation, high rates of graft integration, favorable clinical results, and a low incidence of complications. Moreover, the remodeling of the graft during the follow-up period significantly restored the width and concavity of the inferior glenoid, contributing to the overall recovery.

Level of evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Purpose: To evaluate procedural heterogeneity, patient reported outcomes (PRO), and complications following geniculate artery embolization (GAE) for knee OA.

Methods: A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases from inception to August 2023 according to the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. Human clinical studies reporting PROs following GAE for treatment of knee OA were included and a qualitative comparison across PROs, procedural descriptions and complications was performed. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and the MINORS criteria. The primary outcome measures included changes in PROs at 12 months and variances in procedural methodology.

Results: A total of 17 studies, consisting of 533 patients and 620 knees were identified. The reported mean improvement at 12 months for VAS pain and WOMAC scores ranged from 10-59 and 35.3-47, respectively. At 12 months, median improvements were observed in KOOS subscales such as Pain (range, 8.3-19.5), QOL (15.49-25.0), Sport (7.5-26.3) and Symptoms (1.8-25.0). Decreasing MCID achievement was observed between the 3 month and 6 month follow-up points. Patients with advanced OA and degenerative findings on MRI exhibited lower rates of MCID achievement. Transient adverse events occurred in up to 80% of patients. Limited evidence from serial MRI assessments suggests that GAE improves levels of synovitis. Significant heterogeneity exists among the GAE methodology as 4 different definitions of technical success, 4 distinct embolization targets and use of 5 embolization agents were noted.

Conclusion: GAE results in short-term improvements in pain and function with decreasing MCID achievement observed after 3 to 6 months. Patients with severe OA also demonstrate lower rates of MCID achievement. A high rate of transient complications are reported including skin discoloration and access site hematomas. Significant protocol heterogeneity exists which contributes to variable outcomes.

Level of evidence: IV; Systematic Review of Level IV Studies.

Purpose: To evaluate the safety of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with suture augmentation (SA) through clinical evaluations, monitoring of complications, and evaluation of early graft remodeling using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Methods: Data of participants who underwent anatomic double-bundle ACLR using hamstring tendon autografts, with a minimum 2-year follow-up, were retrospectively reviewed. Participants undergoing ACLR with SA were propensity-matched with those without SA. Postoperative clinical evaluations, including Lysholm and Tegner activity scores, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) evaluation scores, KT-1000 side-to-side difference for knee stability at a 2-year follow-up, and complications, were recorded. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated for IKDC scores. The anteromedial bundle graft was categorized into distal, middle, and proximal regions on the 6-month and 1-year postoperative MRI. The signal-to-noise quotient (SNQ) of each region of interest was calculated to evaluate the graft signal intensity, which was compared between the two groups using Welch's t-test.

Results: Fifty-three participants were included in each group. No significant differences were observed between the non-SA and SA groups in the Lysholm scores (96.6 ± 6.2; 95.3 ± 5.8, P = 0.25), Tegner activity scores (4.8 ± 1.4; 5.0 ± 1.3, P = 0.49), IKDC scores (90.4 ± 10.8; 87.1 ± 12.9, P = 0.15), percentage of patients meeting the MCID (94.3%; 83.0%, P = 0.12), or postoperative KT-1000 side-to-side difference (0.9 ±1.2; 0.7 ± 1.8 mm, P = 0.56). One (1.8%) and two (3.7%) cases of re-tears occurred in the non-SA and SA groups, respectively; no other complications occurred. The postoperative SNQ measurements revealed no significant differences in signal changes in all regions of the grafts between the two groups.

Conclusions: This study confirmed no difference in graft signal intensity on MRI or clinical outcome between ACLR with and without SA at the 2-year follow-up.

Level of evidence: Level III, retrospective, comparative study.

Purpose: To evaluate the Efficacy and safety of intra-articular injection of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) versus Hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

Methods: Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified through a search of Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of science, SinoMed and CNKI databases from inception to March 2024. For meta-analysis, data on clinical outcomes were measured using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and data on cartilage repair were measured using the Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS); data on safety was evaluated by the incidence of adverse events. Two researchers independently read the included literatures, extracted data and evaluated the quality, and used Cochrane risk bias assessment tool for bias risk assessment, and RevMan5.3 software for Meta-analysis.

Result: Ten RCTs involving 818 patients with KOA ranging from I-Ⅲ Kellgren - Lawrence grading scale were included in this meta-analysis. Meta results showed that compared with the HA control group, at 12months, the WOMAC total score ［MD=-10.22, 95% CI (-14.86∼-5.59), P<0.0001, Z=4.32］;VAS score［MD=-1.31, 95% CI (-1.90∼-0.73), P<0.0001, Z=4.40］; WORMS score ［MD=-26.01,95% CI （-31.88∼-20.14）,P<0.001,Z=8.69］of MSCs group all decreased significantly (P<0.05), and reached the minimum clinically important differences (MCID). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events (RR=1.54, 95% CI= 0.85 ∼ 2.79, P=0.16, I²=0) between the two groups (P >0.05).

Conclusion: Compared to HA, intra-articular injection of MSCs therapy appears to effectively alleviate joint pain, improve clinical function of KOA patients. These benefits are observed to last for at least 12 months without an increase in adverse events. Due to limited, varied, and lacking MCID results in existing literature，further research is needed.

Level of evidence: Level I, Meta-analysis of Level I studies.

The Fragility Index (FI) is defined as the number of patients whose outcome would need to change to reverse a statistically significant finding to a nonsignificant finding. The FI is nothing more than a repackaging of statistical significance based on the P value, perpetuating the (1) ignoring of results that are "not" statistically significant; (2) treating results that are statistically significant as certain; and (3) distracting from evaluation of clinical significance. A well-designed trial includes a sample size calculation to determine the minimum number of patients required to observe a difference between study groups (if a difference exists). By including this minimum number, clinical trials are designed to be fragile, yet subsequently criticized as such, leading readers to the incorrect conclusion that the studies are flawed. It's time to move past systematic reviews focused on the FI.

Up to one half of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction demonstrate some degree of knee hyperextension in their contralateral limb. In most cases, this is mild (1°-5°), but it is reported that 9% and 0.8% demonstrate moderate (6°-10°) and severe (>10°) degrees of hyperextension. These characteristics pose challenges and considerations for surgical management. This includes the finding that failure to regain full hyperextension is common and is associated with inferior functional outcomes and patient satisfaction, and the juxtaposition that regaining full hyperextension may increase graft rupture and persistent instability rates. Although the pathophysiology of extension deficit is multifactorial, 2 particularly important and modifiable risk factors in this population are notch impingement and arthrogenic muscle inhibition. Strategies to avoid notch impingement include anterior notchplasty and careful consideration of graft size, graft type, and tibial tunnel placement. Arthrogenic muscle inhibition is clinically characterized by extension deficit and quadriceps activation failure. It is reversible in most patients and therefore an important modifiable risk factor. Since failure to regain full hyperextension is associated with inferior outcomes, abolishing extension deficit should be a key objective of surgical treatment and rehabilitation. Concerns regarding the risks of persistent laxity and graft rupture in knee hyperlaxity/hyperextension patients can be mitigated by the addition of anterolateral ligament reconstruction.

Periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is the agreed upon treatment for symptomatic hip dysplasia in the skeletally mature patient. Many surgeons perform hip arthroscopy to address intra-articular damage around the time of the PAO. Other surgeons believe that correcting the dysplasia with the PAO unloads the soft tissues, which negates the need for arthroscopy. Current evidence is unclear as to whether hip arthroscopy, whether concomitant or staged, is needed when performing PAO for hip dysplasia. In the United States, the chosen approach is often determined by surgeon training, comfort level, and logistical issues. Over time, the chosen approach may change, as more surgeons are trained in both open and arthroscopic hip preservation. Certainly, some patients benefit from hip arthroscopy along with PAO for labral pathology and/or femoral cam deformity.

Purpose: To provide a summary of available literature on the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID), Substantial Clinical Benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI).

Methods: A systematic review was conducted via the Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase to identify studies that calculated MCID, SCB, or PASS for Patient Reported Outcome Measures PROMs after hip arthroscopy for FAI. The electronic search strategy used was as follows: hip AND arthroscopy AND (MCID OR "minimal clinically important difference" OR SCB OR "substantial clinical benefit" OR PASS OR "patient acceptable symptom state"). Inclusion criteria were English language studies published from 1980 to 2023 reporting clinical outcome scores and calculated values of MCID, PASS, or SCB for patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI.

Results: Forty-two studies (5 level II, 19 level III, and 18 level IV) met inclusion and exclusion criteria. The most commonly used outcome measures across MCID, SCB, and PASS were the Hip Outcome Score sports-specific subscale (HOS-SSS) and the activities of daily living subscale (HOS-ADL), the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and the twelve-item international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12). The range of MCID values for HOS-SSS, HOS-ADL, mHHS, and iHOT-12 were 7.2-15.7, 7.3-15.4, 7.2-16.8, and 8.8-16.2 respectively. Similarly, for SCB the values ranged from 77.9-96.9, 90.4-98.5, 20.0-98.4, and 66.7-87.5, respectively. Lastly, the PASS values ranged from 63.9-80.9, 85.9-99.2, 74.0-97.0, and 59.5-86.0, respectively.

Conclusion: MCID, SCB, and PASS values for PROMs following hip arthroscopy for the management of FAI are highly dependent on their associated study including study population and calculation methods.

Level of evidence: IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.