Freek Hollman

Background/Objectives: Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) is a common injury for which numerous operative fixation and reconstructive techniques have been described. This technique combines a coracoclavicular ligament (CC) repair with an acromioclavicular ligament (AC) and CC reconstruction with an additional ACJ internal brace to address both horizontal and vertical instability. Methods: The surgery is performed through a superior approach in the following sequence: (1) CC ligaments are repaired using a TightRope construct, (2) CC reconstruction is performed using a peroneus longus tendon allograft, (3) AC ligaments are repaired using an internal brace, and (4) AC reconstruction is performed with a second peroneus longus tendon allograft. The results of consecutive patients with grade IIIB, IV, and V AC joint dislocations were included. Results: Six patients with acute and six patients with chronic injuries were eligible for inclusion. The Constant–Murley Score improved significantly from 27.6 (8.0–56.5) to 61.5 (42.0–92.0) (p = 0.006 paired t-test) at 12 months of follow-up. There was one complication (frozen shoulder) from which the patient recovered spontaneously; no other complications were observed with this technique. The coracoclavicular distance (CCD) was reduced from 18.7 mm (13.0–24.0) to 10.0 mm (6.0–16.0, p < 0.001) and 10.5 mm (8.0–14.0, p = 0.002) at 12 weeks and 12 months, respectively. Conclusions: This study describes a new technique to treat acute and chronic Rockwood stage IIIB–V ACJ dislocations with promising short-term clinical and radiological results. The results suggest that the combined repair and reconstruction of the AC and CC ligaments is a safe procedure with low complication risk in experienced hands. Addressing the vertical and horizontal stability in ACJ dislocation is key to achieving optimal long-term results. Further, follow-up is required to investigate the long-term outcomes.

Revision shoulder arthroplasty is increasing with the number of primary shoulder replacements rising globally. Complex primary and revisions of shoulder arthroplasties pose specific challenges for the surgeon, which must be addressed preoperatively and intraoperatively. This article aimed to present strategies for the management of revision of shoulder arthroplasties through a single-stage approach. Preoperatively, patient factors, such as age, comorbidities, and bone quality, should be considered. The use of planning software can aid in accurately evaluating implants in situ and predict bony anatomy that will remain after explantation during the revision surgery. The planning from such software can then be executed with the help of mixed reality technology to allow accurate implant placement. Single-stage revision is performed in two steps (debridement as first step, implantation and reconstruction as the second step), guided by the following principles: adequate debridement while preserving key soft tissue attachments (i.e., rotator cuff, pectoralis major, latissimus dorsi, deltoid), restoration of glenoid joint line using bone grafting, restoration of humeral length, reconstruction and/or reattachment of soft tissues, and strict compliance with the postoperative antibiotic regimen. Preliminary results of single-stage revision shoulder arthroplasty show improvement in patient outcomes (mean 1 year), successful treatment of infection for those diagnosed with periprosthetic joint infection, and improved cost–benefit parameters for the healthcare system.

Purpose: To assess the interchangeability of various existing answering scales within the subjective part of the Constant–Murley Score (CMS) and to determine the effect of the different answering scales on the inter‐ and intraobserver reliability. Methods: In this prospective, single‐center, cross‐sectional trial, patients with shoulder problems were included from June to September 2018. Subjects recruited were 18 years or older, presented various shoulder complaints, e.g., diagnosis of osteoarthritis, subacromial pain syndrome, rotator cuff or biceps tendon problems, or frozen shoulder. An extended version of the CMS was prepared including the same questions multiple times but with varying answer scales. Six versions were made with random order of the questions. The answering scales were a verbal and paper based visual analog scale (VAS), smiley face scale, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and categories. Internal consistency of the various CMS, Spearman correlation coefficients, intraobserver, and interobserver agreement was assessed (ICC). Results: In total, 93 patients were included. The total CMS using the paper‐based VAS, smiley face score, and NRS were 46.9 ± 19.4, 45.2 ± 18.5, and 45.0 ± 18.7. Correlations of the total scores of the different versions varied from 0.98 to 0.99. CMS‐category versus CMS‐smiley face score and CMS‐category versus CMS‐NRS pain were significantly different ( P = .02 and P = .01). Good internal consistency (0.76‐0.79) and acceptable inter‐ and intraobserver reliability were found (ICC: 0.89‐0.97, 0.98‐0.99; P < .001). Conclusions: The different answering scales for the subjective subscales within the CMS for pain, work, and recreational activity were not interchangeable on item level and significantly influenced the total CMS score. Differences were below the smallest detectable change and interpreted as not clinically relevant. Particularly on item level, data from different studies cannot be pooled and compared when different answering scales are being used. The inter‐ and intraobserver reliability were excellent. Level of Evidence: Level I, prospective cross‐sectional study.

Purpose: To study the effects on pain as the main outcome parameter and on function and cuff integrity as the secondary outcome parameters after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in the short term comparing the abduction brace with an antirotation sling for postoperative shoulder immobilization. Methods: Eligible patients were between the ages of 18 and 75 years who were diagnosed with a traumatic or degenerative tear of the supraspinatus and/or infraspinatus tendon, confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging, for which an arthroscopic footprint repair was indicated and performed. Patients were randomly allocated to the antirotation sling or abduction brace group. Postoperative pain and use of analgesics were accurately registered up to 3 months after surgery using a patient diary. Follow‐up examinations including the Constant‐Murley score, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index, and glenohumeral range of motion were scheduled 6 weeks, 3 and 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. Results: The average level of pain measured directly postoperation up to 1 year after surgery was not significant different between groups. Postoperatively, function scores and glenohumeral range of motion improved significantly for both groups; however, no differences were observed between groups. No retears were observed on ultrasonograph 3 months after surgery. Conclusions: In the short term, the level of pain, function, and quality of life were not significantly different between the use of an abduction brace and that of an antirotation sling after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Based on these findings, the abduction brace used in this study does not seem to be the solution for decreasing the pain experienced in the first postoperative weeks after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, and both are recommendable. Level of Evidence: Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Postoperative urinary retention is a common complication after major orthopedic procedures of the lower limb. In total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty, the incidence ranges from 7% to 84%. In this study, the incidence and risk factors for postoperative urinary retention were described in a cohort of 376 men undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Postoperative urinary retention was defined as the inability to void after surgery for which single or indwelling catheterization was performed. Risk factors were identified using multivariate regression analysis. Following total hip arthroplasty, 150 (39.9%) of the 376 men developed urinary retention. Patient-controlled analgesia (odds ratio, 4.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.79–9.40), use of spinal anesthesia (odds ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.07–2.99), and age 70 years or older (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.06–2.95) were independent risk factors for urinary retention. Potential risk factors that were not confirmed included body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (Class I–III), hypertension, diabetes mellitus, prostate pathology, smoking, average pain during the first 24 hours after surgery, and length of surgery. Two of the 150 patients with urinary retention (1.3%) for which a catheter has been inserted developed a urinary tract infection vs none of the patients without urinary retention. The risk of urinary retention after total hip arthroplasty is increased in men older than 70 years, those receiving spinal anesthesia, and those with patient-controlled analgesia postoperatively. [ Orthopedics. 2015; 38(6):e507–e511.]