Arthroscopic Repair of a Posterior Midcapsular Rupture Causing Posterior Shoulder Instability

Background: Gross posterior instability is rare and when found likely has an injury or deficiency to the posterior static restraints of shoulder associated with it. Traditionally, injuries to the posterior capsule have been difficult to diagnose and visualize with magnetic resonance imaging preoperatively, and very little literature regarding arthroscopic repair of posterior capsular tears exists currently. Indications: We present a repair of a posterior midcapsular and posterior labral tear in a 26-year-old man with recurrent left posterior shoulder instability using a novel all–arthroscopic technique. Technique Description: We performed a shoulder arthroscopy in a lateral decubitus position with the arm at 45° of abduction using standard posterior viewing and anterior working portals. Diagnostic arthroscopy revealed a large posterior midcapsular rupture approximately 2 cm lateral to the glenoid with an associated posterior labral tear. We created an accessory posterolateral portal with needle localization that was outside the capsular defect yet allowed access to the posterior labrum. Anatomic closure of the capsular tear was achieved arthroscopically with 3 interrupted No. 2 nonabsorbable sutures in a side–to–side fashion. Posterior labral repair and capsular shift were done to further address the instability using 2 knotless all–suture anchors percutaneously placed at the 7 o'clock and 9 o'clock position. We closed the posterior portal with a combination of curved and penetrating suture passers. Incisions were closed with interrupted 4-0 nylon. Postoperatively, the patient was placed in an ultra–sling for 4 weeks before physical therapy. We allowed light strengthening at 8 weeks, full strengthening at 12 weeks, and estimated return to sport at 4 months. Results: At 6 months postoperatively, the patient has regained symmetric motion, full strength, and has no residual pain or instability. Conclusion: Gross posterior instability is a rare and difficult condition to diagnose and manage. If no significant labral injuries are identified, injury to the posterior capsule must be considered and full assessment should be done when visualizing from the anterior portal. Repair of the posterior capsule is necessary and can be achieved all arthroscopically with this technique.

Are Outcomes of Acute Meniscus Root Tear Repair Better Than Debridement or Nonoperative Management? A Systematic Review

Background: Meniscus root tears (MRTs) are defined as radial tears within 1 cm of the meniscus root insertion or an avulsion of the meniscus root itself. They lead to altered joint loading because of the failure to convert axial (compressive) loads into hoop stresses. Untreated MRTs can result in altered joint biomechanics and accelerated articular cartilage degeneration and the development of osteoarthritis (OA), yet optimal management remains unclear. Purpose: To review treatment outcomes after acute MRTs by surgical repair, debridement, meniscectomy, or nonoperative treatment. Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of the evidence from human clinical studies was conducted with electronic searches of the PUBMED, Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases. One reviewer extracted the data and 2 reviewers assessed the risk of bias and performed synthesis of the evidence. Results: Eleven studies of low to moderate methodological quality were identified. All treatment options improved functional scores after >12 months. Arthroscopic repair may be associated with better functional outcomes when compared with partial meniscectomy and nonoperative management at 12-month follow-up. Radiographic progression of OA occurred in all treatment groups; there was some evidence that this was delayed after repair when compared with other treatments. Baseline severity of meniscal extrusion, varus malalignment, and pretreatment degeneration were predictors of poor functional outcomes. Age was not found to be an independent predictor of functional outcome. Conclusion: The current level 3 and 4 evidence suggests that arthroscopic repair may result in slower progression of radiological deterioration compared with meniscectomy and nonoperative management. The current literature does not support the exclusion of patients from MRT repair on the basis of age. Patients undergoing acute MRT treatments (repair, debridement, or nonoperative) can be expected to experience improvement in functional outcomes after >12 months. The strength of conclusions are limited because of the paucity of high-quality studies on this subject. Further studies, preferably randomized sham controlled trials with function-oriented rehabilitation programs, are needed to compare treatment strategies and stratification of care based on the risk of meniscal extrusion. Registration: CRD42018085092 (PROSPERO).

Second-Look Arthroscopic Evaluation of Healing Rates After Arthroscopic Repair of Meniscal Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background: Evaluation of meniscal healing status after repair is important, as it allows the surgeon to inform patients whether they can increase their activities or return to sports. Purpose: To identify the healing rates after arthroscopic repair of meniscal tears via second-look arthroscopic evaluation. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Searches of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane databases were conducted to identify relevant studies published before June 1, 2020. Studies were eligible for this meta-analysis if they provided data regarding healing status of the meniscus at second-look arthroscopy. Random-effects meta-analyses were generated to provide pooled meniscal healing estimates. We further performed subgroup analysis to investigate the healing rates of the meniscus under different situations. Results: A total of 41 studies with 1908 individuals were included in the study. The pooled analysis showed the complete healing rate was 74% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67%-80%), the partial healing rate was 10% (95% CI, 6%-16%), and the failure rate was 12% (95% CI, 10%-15%) for arthroscopic repair of meniscal tears via second-look arthroscopic evaluation. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that no individual study affected the overall healing rate by >1%. Subgroup analysis found higher meniscal healing rates in patients with the following characteristics: age <40 years, male, body mass index <26, red-red tear location, tear in posterior horn, vertical tear, outside-in technique, repair concomitant with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, weight-restricted rehabilitation, and time interval from meniscal repair to second-look arthroscopy >12 months. Conclusion: In this systematic review, the complete healing rate was 74%, the partial healing rate was 10%, and the failure rate was 12% for arthroscopic repair of meniscal tears via second-look arthroscopic evaluation.

Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis versus Arthroscopic Repair for SLAP Tears in Patients under 30 (224)

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of mini-open subpectoral biceps tenodesis (BT) to arthroscopic repair (AR) for SLAP tears in patients under 30. Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent either isolated BT or AR for the diagnosis of a SLAP tear was performed. Patients with a follow-up duration of <24 months were excluded. The American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), patient satisfaction, willingness to undergo surgery again, revisions, and return to work/sport were evaluated. A p value of <0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results: Our study included 103 patients in total; 29 patients were treated with BT, and 74 were treated with AR. The mean age was 24.8 years, 79.4% were male, and the mean follow-up duration was 60 months. At final follow up, there was no difference between treatment groups in any of the functional outcome measures assessed (p > 0.05). Overall, there was no significant difference in the total rate of RTP (BT: 76.3%, AR: 85%; p = 0.53), timing of RTP (BT: 8.8 months, AR: 9.4 months; p = 0.61), and total rate of RTP among overhead athletes (BT: 84.2%, AR: 83.3%; p = 1). However, there was a significantly lower rate of revision surgery with BT (0%) as compared to AR (14.1%; p = 0.03). Conclusions: In patients under the age of 30 with isolated SLAP tear pathology, BT is a reliable alternative to AR, with a low rate of revision surgery, and excellent patient reported outcomes.