Search

In recent decades, artificial intelligence (AI) has infiltrated a variety of domains, including media, education, and medicine. There exists no glossary, lexicon, or reference for the uninitiated medical professional to explore the new terminology. As AI-driven technologies and applications become more available for clinical use in healthcare settings, an understanding of basic components, models, and tasks related to AI is crucial for clinical and academic appraisal. Here, we present a glossary of AI definitions that healthcare professionals can utilize to augment personal understanding of AI during this fourth industrial revolution., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Dissatisfaction after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) ranges from 15 to 30%. While patient selection may be partially responsible, morphological and reconstructive challenges may be determinants. Preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans for TKA planning allow us to evaluate the hip-knee-ankle axis and establish a baseline phenotypic distribution across anatomic parameters. The purpose of this cross-sectional analysis was to establish the distributions of 27 parameters in a pre-TKA cohort and perform threshold analysis to identify anatomic outliers., Methods: There were 1,352 pre-TKA CTs that were processed. A 2-step deep learning pipeline of classification and segmentation models identified landmark images and then generated contour representations. We used an open-source computer vision library to compute measurements for 27 anatomic metrics along the hip-knee axis. Normative distribution plots were established, and thresholds for the 15th percentile at both extremes were calculated. Metrics falling outside the central 70th percentile were considered outlier indices. A threshold analysis of outlier indices against the proportion of the cohort was performed., Results: Significant variation exists in pre-TKA anatomy across 27 normally distributed metrics. Threshold analysis revealed a sigmoid function with a critical point at 9 outlier indices, representing 31.2% of subjects as anatomic outliers. Metrics with the greatest variation related to deformity (tibiofemoral angle, medial proximal tibial angle, lateral distal femoral angle), bony size (tibial width, anteroposterior femoral size, femoral head size, medial femoral condyle size), intraoperative landmarks (posterior tibial slope, transepicondylar and posterior condylar axes), and neglected rotational considerations (acetabular and femoral version, femoral torsion)., Conclusions: In the largest non-industry database of pre-TKA CTs using a fully automated 3-stage deep learning and computer vision-based pipeline, marked anatomic variation exists. In the pursuit of understanding the dissatisfaction rate after TKA, acknowledging that 31% of patients represent anatomic outliers may help us better achieve anatomically personalized TKA, with or without adjunctive technology., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the integration of technological advancements in orthopedic shoulder surgery. Recent technological advancements in orthopedic shoulder surgery include predictive analytics, computer-navigated instrumentation for operative planning, extended reality, and robotics. Separately, these advancements provide distinct methodological attempts to improve surgical experiences and outcomes. Together, these technologies can provide orthopedic surgeons with the tools and capabilities to improve patient care and communication in shoulder arthroplasty. From artificial intelligence-generated predictive analytics to extended reality and robotics, technical innovations may lead to improvements in patient education, surgical accuracy, interdisciplinary communication, and outcomes. A comprehensive narrative review was conducted to explore the technological advancements of orthopedic shoulder arthroplasty. Our findings emphasized the impact of these advancements, exemplified by early enhancements in efficacy and safety. However, certain challenges remain, such as a lack of reproducibly improved outcomes and cost considerations. While the reviewed studies indicate hope for improving shoulder arthroplasty, the true cost-effectiveness and applicability remains to be determined, indicating the need for further research., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Background: As demand for total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty increases, more surgeons have pursued subspecialty training in adult reconstruction. However, little information is available regarding the practice environment in which these fellowship-trained surgeons practice. The purpose of this study was to describe the practice environments of contemporary adult reconstruction surgeons., Methods: A survey was developed and distributed to members of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons from December 2022 to January 2023. Information was collected on surgeon demographics, practice setting, call requirements, and educational debt. Responses were recorded using frequencies and proportions., Results: A total of 886 of 2471 (36%) surgeons completed the survey, with 93% identifying as male and 81% as white. The primary surgical practice locations were: community hospital 53%, academic/tertiary hospital 24%, specialty orthopedic hospital 17%, and ambulatory surgery center 7%. Nearly half (49%) of the respondents practiced in orthopedic specialty groups, and 60% spent 50%-66% of their clinical time in the office. The majority of surgeons performed between 101-250 (20%) and 251-400 (31%) arthroplasty cases per year, though this varied considerably. Call was taken by 77% of surgeons, yet only 54% received compensation., Conclusions: The most common practice setting for adult reconstruction surgeons was in a community-based hospital as part of a large orthopedic specialty group. Despite the considerable variability in annual procedure volume, the majority of surgeons spent over half their clinical time in office and had call obligations with variable compensation models., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: Variability in the bony morphology of pathologic hips/knees is a challenge in automating preoperative computed tomography (CT) scan measurements. With the increasing prevalence of CT for advanced preoperative planning, processing this data represents a critical bottleneck in presurgical planning, research, and development. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate a reproducible and scalable methodology for analyzing CT-based anatomy to process hip and knee anatomy for perioperative planning and execution., Methods: One hundred patients with preoperative CT scans undergoing total knee arthroplasty for osteoarthritis were processed. A two-step deep learning pipeline of classification and segmentation models was developed that identifies landmark images and then generates contour representations. We utilized an open-source computer vision library to compute measurements. Classification models were assessed by accuracy, precision, and recall. Segmentation models were evaluated using dice and mean Intersection over Union (IOU) metrics. Contour measurements were compared against manual measurements to validate posterior condylar axis angle, sulcus angle, trochlear groove-tibial tuberosity distance, acetabular anteversion, and femoral version., Results: Classifiers identified landmark images with accuracy of 0.91 and 0.88 for hip and knee models, respectively. Segmentation models demonstrated mean IOU scores above 0.95 with the highest dice coefficient of 0.957 [0.954-0.961] (UNet3+) and the highest mean IOU of 0.965 [0.961-0.969] (Attention U-Net). There were no statistically significant differences for the measurements taken automatically vs manually ( P > 0.05). Average time for the pipeline to preprocess (48.65 +/- 4.41 sec), classify/retrieve landmark images (8.36 +/- 3.40 sec), segment images (<1 sec), and obtain measurements was 2.58 (+/- 1.92) minutes., Conclusions: A fully automated three-stage deep learning and computer vision-based pipeline of classification and segmentation models accurately localized, segmented, and measured landmark hip and knee images for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Incorporation of clinical parameters, like patient-reported outcome measures and instability risk, will be important considerations alongside anatomic parameters., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Background: Little is known about the effect of modern hip arthroscopy on the natural history of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) with respect to joint preservation., Purpose: To (1) characterize the natural history of FAIS and (2) understand the effect of modern hip arthroscopy by radiographically comparing the hips of patients who underwent only unilateral primary hip arthroscopy with a minimum follow-up of 10 years., Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: Between 2010 and 2012, 619 consecutive patients were reviewed from the practice of a single fellowship-trained hip arthroscopic surgeon. Inclusion criteria were FAIS, bilateral radiographic findings of femoroacetabular impingement, primary unilateral hip arthroscopy (labral repair, femoroplasty, or capsular closure), and minimum 10-year follow-up. The preoperative and minimum 10-year postoperative radiographs of patients were evaluated at each time point. Both operative and nonoperative hips were graded using the Tönnis classification or the presence of hip arthroplasty by 2 independent reviewers. Subgroup analyses were performed., Results: A total of 200 hips from 100 patients were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 12.0 years. Preoperatively, 98% and 99% of operative and nonoperative hips were evaluated as Tönnis grades 0 and 1, respectively; 5% of nonoperative hips had worse Tönnis grades than operative hips. The nonoperative hip advanced to a worse Tönnis grade in 48% (48/100) of cases compared with 28% (28/100) among operative hips. At follow-up, Tönnis grades between hips were equal in 70% (70/100) of the cases, the operative hip had a better grade 25% (25/100) of the time, and the nonoperative hip had a better grade 5% (5/100) of the time. Modern hip arthroscopy was associated with a relative risk reduction of 42% in osteoarthritis progression. Impingement with borderline dysplasia, age, preoperative Tönnis grade, and alpha angle >65° were key risk factors in the radiographic progression of osteoarthritis., Conclusion: Although the majority of patients (70%) undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAIS did not experience differences between operative and nonoperative hips in terms of the radiographic progression of osteoarthritis, the natural history may be favorably altered for 25% of patients whose Tönnis grade was better after undergoing arthroscopic correction. Modern hip arthroscopy indications and techniques represent a valid joint-preservation procedure conferring a relative risk reduction of 42% in the progression of osteoarthritis. Arthroscopy for mixed patterns of impingement and instability were the fastest to degenerate., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflicts of interest or source of funding. P.N.R. has received consulting fees from Pacira; hospitality payments from Stryker; consulting fees and royalties from Globus; research support from Arthrex; and support for education from Smith & Nephew and has ownership in Intelligent Health Analytics Inc and Overture. D.H.N. has received consulting fees from Linvatec Corporation; hospitality payments from Stryker and Arthrex; support for education from Gotham Surgical Solutions & Devices; and royalties from Smith & Nephew. B.T.K. has received consulting fees and royalties from Arthrex; hospitality payments from Stryker; and faculty or speaker fees from Synthes GmbH. AJSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.

Purpose: To (1) characterize the various forms of wearable sensor devices (WSDs) and (2) review the peer-reviewed literature of applied wearable technology within sports medicine., Methods: A systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE databases, from inception through 2023, was conducted to identify eligible studies using WSDs within sports medicine. Data extraction was performed of study demographics and sensor specifications. Included studies were categorized by application: athletic training, rehabilitation, and research., Results: In total, 43 studies met criteria for inclusion in this review. Forms of WSDs include pedometers, accelerometers, encoders (consisting of magnetometers and gyroscopes), force sensors, global positioning system trackers, and inertial measurement units. Outcome metrics include step counts; gait, limb motion, and angular positioning; foot and skin pressure; change of direction and inclination, including analysis of both body parts and athletes on a field; displacement and velocity of body segments and joints; heart rate; plethysmography; sport-specific kinematics; range of motion, symmetry, and alignment; head impact; sleep; throwing biomechanics; and kinetic and spatiotemporal running metrics. WSDs are used in athletic training to assess sport-specific biomechanics and workload with a goal of injury prevention and training optimization, as well as for rehabilitation monitoring and research such as for risk predicting and aiding diagnosis., Conclusions: WSDs enable real-time monitoring of human performance across a variety of implementations and settings, allowing collection of metrics otherwise not achievable. WSDs are powerful tools with multiple applications within athletic training, patient rehabilitation, and orthopaedic and sports medicine research., Clinical Relevance: Wearable technology may represent the missing link to quantitatively addressing return to play and previous performance. WSDs are commercially available and portable adjuncts that allow clinicians, trainers, and individual athletes to monitor biomechanical parameters, workload, and recovery status to better contextualize personalized training, injury risk, and rehabilitation., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report the following potential conflicts of interest or sources of funding: P.N.R. reports a relationship with Intelligent Health Analytics Inc and Globus that includes: equity or stocks; and is an Associate Editor of Arthroscopy. All other authors (R.J.O., S.S.H., J.J.W., D.H.N.) declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Full ICMJE author disclosure forms are available for this article online, as supplementary material., (Copyright © 2024 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Post anesthesia care units (PACU) await return of motor function in lower extremities, prior to discharge for patients undergoing spinal anesthesia. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of a newly utilized recovery protocol that facilitated early discharges of patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA) to the floor before full motor recovery from spinal anesthesia is achieved., Methods: A total of 647 patients undergoing spinal anesthesia for primary THA (n = 190) and TKA (n = 457) were divided into 2 groups: (1) Early PACU discharge group: patients with partial or full motor blockade at discharge. (2) Control PACU discharge group: patients with full motor recovery at discharge. Readiness for discharge was assessed using a modified Aldrete Score system. The primary outcome was incidences of hypotension or rapid responses post-operatively., Results: There was no significant difference in the incidence of hypotension between the two groups (1.4 versus 1.39%, P = 1.0) and zero rapid responses were noted. Early discharge shortened mean PACU LOS time from 86.50 minutes to 70.27 minutes (P < .01). There was no difference in the incidence of nausea (0.55 versus 0%; P = .51) ordizziness (2.22 versus 0.35%; P = .09)., Conclusion: In this retrospective observational study, we found that early PACU discharge did not result in an increase in hemodynamic consequences on the surgical floor. Thus, discharge from PACU can be safely and more expeditiously performed without waiting for return of motor function in patients receiving spinal anesthesia for THA/TKA using a modified Aldrete Score recovery protocol., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article ( http://links.lww.com/JBJS/H691 ).

Background: Software-infused services, from robot-assisted and wearable technologies to artificial intelligence (AI)-laden analytics, continue to augment clinical orthopaedics - namely hip and knee arthroplasty. Extended reality (XR) tools, which encompass augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality technology, represent a new frontier for expanding surgical horizons to maximize technical education, expertise, and execution. The purpose of this review is to critically detail and evaluate the recent developments surrounding XR in the field of hip and knee arthroplasty and to address potential future applications as they relate to AI., Methods: In this narrative review surrounding XR, we discuss (1) definitions, (2) techniques, (3) studies, (4) current applications, and (5) future directions. We highlight XR subsets (augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality) as they relate to AI in the increasingly digitized ecosystem within hip and knee arthroplasty., Results: A narrative review of the XR orthopaedic ecosystem with respect to XR developments is summarized with specific emphasis on hip and knee arthroplasty. The XR as a tool for education, preoperative planning, and surgical execution is discussed with future applications dependent upon AI to potentially obviate the need for robotic assistance and preoperative advanced imaging without sacrificing accuracy., Conclusion: In a field where exposure is critical to clinical success, XR represents a novel stand-alone software-infused service that optimizes technical education, execution, and expertise but necessitates integration with AI and previously validated software solutions to offer opportunities that improve surgical precision with or without the use of robotics and computed tomography-based imaging., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Surgical management of complications following knee arthroplasty demands accurate and timely identification of implant manufacturer and model. Automated image processing using deep machine learning has been previously developed and internally validated; however, external validation is essential prior to scaling clinical implementation for generalizability., Methods: We trained, validated, and externally tested a deep learning system to classify knee arthroplasty systems as one of the 9 models from 4 manufacturers derived from 4,724 original, retrospectively collected anteroposterior plain knee radiographs across 3 academic referral centers. From these radiographs, 3,568 were used for training, 412 for validation, and 744 for external testing. Augmentation was applied to the training set (n = 3,568,000) to increase model robustness. Performance was determined by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Implant identification processing speed was calculated. The training and testing sets were drawn from statistically different populations of implants (P < .001)., Results: After 1,000 training epochs by the deep learning system, the system discriminated 9 implant models with a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.989, accuracy of 97.4%, sensitivity of 89.2%, and specificity of 99.0% in the external testing dataset of 744 anteroposterior radiographs. The software classified implants at a mean speed of 0.02 seconds per image., Conclusion: An artificial intelligence-based software for identifying knee arthroplasty implants demonstrated excellent internal and external validation. Although continued surveillance is necessary with implant library expansion, this software represents a responsible and meaningful clinical application of artificial intelligence with immediate potential to globally scale and assist in preoperative planning prior to revision knee arthroplasty., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The surgical management of complications after total hip arthroplasty (THA) necessitates accurate identification of the femoral implant manufacturer and model. Automated image processing using deep learning has been previously developed and internally validated; however, external validation is necessary prior to responsible application of artificial intelligence (AI)-based technologies., Methods: We trained, validated, and externally tested a deep learning system to classify femoral-sided THA implants as one of the 8 models from 2 manufacturers derived from 2,954 original, deidentified, retrospectively collected anteroposterior plain radiographs across 3 academic referral centers and 13 surgeons. From these radiographs, 2,117 were used for training, 249 for validation, and 588 for external testing. Augmentation was applied to the training set (n = 2,117,000) to increase model robustness. Performance was evaluated by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Implant identification processing speed was calculated., Results: The training and testing sets were drawn from statistically different populations of implants (P < .001). After 1,000 training epochs by the deep learning system, the system discriminated 8 implant models with a mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.991, accuracy of 97.9%, sensitivity of 88.6%, and specificity of 98.9% in the external testing dataset of 588 anteroposterior radiographs. The software classified implants at a mean speed of 0.02 seconds per image., Conclusion: An AI-based software demonstrated excellent internal and external validation. Although continued surveillance is necessary with implant library expansion, this software represents responsible and meaningful clinical application of AI with immediate potential to globally scale and assist in preoperative planning prior to revision THA., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite a growing understanding of spinopelvic biomechanics in total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is no validated approach for executing patient-specific acetabular component positioning. The purpose of this study was to (1) validate quantitative, patient-specific acetabular "safe zone" component positioning from spinopelvic parameters and (2) characterize differences between quantitative patient-specific acetabular targets and qualitative hip-spine classification targets., Methods: From 2,457 consecutive primary THA patients, 22 (0.88%) underwent revision for instability. Spinopelvic parameters were measured prior to index THA. Acetabular position was measured following index and revision arthroplasty. Using a mathematical proof, we developed an open-source tool translating a surgeon-selected, preoperative standing acetabular target to a patient-specific safe zone intraoperative acetabular target. Difference between the patient-specific safe zone and the actual component position was compared before and after revision. Hip-spine classification targets were compared to patient-specific safe zone targets., Results: Of the 22 who underwent revision, none dislocated at follow-up (4.6 [range, 1 to 6.9]). Patient-specific safe zone targets differed from prerevision acetabular component position by 9.1 ± 4.2° inclination/13.3 ± 6.7° version; after revision, the mean difference was 3.2 ± 3.0° inclination/5.3 ± 2.7° version. Differences between patient-specific safe zones and the median and extremes of recommended hip-spine classification targets were 2.2 ± 1.9° inclination/5.6 ± 3.7° version and 3.0 ± 2.3° inclination/7.9 ± 3.5° version, respectively., Conclusion: A mathematically derived, patient-specific approach accommodating spinopelvic biomechanics for acetabular component positioning was validated by approximating revised, now-stable hips within 5° version and 3° inclination. These patient-specific safe zones augment the hip-spine classification with prescriptive quantitative targets for nuanced preoperative planning., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aims of the study were to report for a cohort aged younger than 40 years: 1) indications for HRA; 2) patient-reported outcomes in terms of the modified Harris Hip Score (HHS); 3) dislocation rate; and 4) revision rate., Methods: This retrospective analysis identified 267 hips from 224 patients who underwent an hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) from a single fellowship-trained surgeon using the direct lateral approach between 2007 and 2019. Inclusion criteria was minimum two-year follow-up, and age younger than 40 years. Patients were followed using a prospectively maintained institutional database., Results: A total of 217 hips (81%) were included for follow-up analysis at a mean of 3.8 years. Of the 23 females who underwent HRA, none were revised, and the median head size was 46 mm (compared to 50 mm for males). The most common indication for HRA was femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (n = 133), and avascular necrosis ( (n = 53). Mean postoperative HHS was 100 at two and five years. No dislocations occurred. A total of four hips (1.8%) required reoperation for resection of heterotopic ossification, removal of components for infection, and subsidence with loosening. The overall revision rate was 0.9%., Conclusion: For younger patients with higher functional expectations and increased lifetime risk for revision, HRA is an excellent bone preserving intervention carrying low complication rates, revision rates, and excellent patient outcomes without lifetime restrictions allowing these patients to return to activity and sport. Thus, in younger male patients with end-stage hip disease and higher demands, referral to a high-volume HRA surgeon should be considered., Competing Interests: P. J. Brooks reports royalties or licenses, whereby the author licensed mushroom templates to Smith & Nephew (instruments used in the procedure), and being a consultant for Smith & Nephew, which is related to this work. P. N. Ramkumar declares consulting fees from Stryker and Globus, royalties from Globus, support for attending meetings and/or travel from Stryker and Arthrex, and stock or stock options from Intelligent Health Analytics Inc., Overture Resurfacing, Johnson & Johnson, and Conformis, all of which is unrelated to this article., (© 2023 Author(s) et al.)

Background: Graft failure after osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA) of the knee is a devastating outcome, often necessitating subsequent interventions. A comprehensive understanding of the risk factors for failure after OCA of the knee may provide enhanced prognostic data for the knee surgeon and facilitate more informed shared decision-making discussions before surgery., Purpose: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors associated with graft failure after OCA of the knee., Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4., Methods: The PubMed, Ovid/MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases were queried in April 2021. Data pertaining to study characteristics and risk factors associated with failure after OCA were recorded. DerSimonian-Laird binary random-effects models were constructed to quantitatively evaluate the association between risk factors and graft failure by generating effect estimates in the form of odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs, while mean differences (MDs) were calculated for continuous data. Qualitative analysis was performed to describe risk factors that were variably reported., Results: A total of 16 studies consisting of 1401 patients were included. The overall pooled prevalence of failure was 18.9% (range, 10%-46%). There were 44 risk factors identified, of which 9 were explored quantitatively. There was strong evidence to support that the presence of bipolar chondral defects (OR, 4.20 [95% CI, 1.17-15.08]; P = .028) and male sex (OR, 2.04 [95% CI, 1.17-3.55]; P = .012) were significant risk factors for failure after OCA. Older age (MD, 5.06 years [95% CI, 1.44-8.70]; P = .006) and greater body mass index (MD, 1.75 kg/m 2 [95% CI, 0.48-3.03]; P = .007) at the time of surgery were also significant risk factors for failure after OCA. There was no statistically significant evidence to incontrovertibly support that concomitant procedures, chondral defect size, and defect location were associated with an increased risk of failure after OCA., Conclusion: Bipolar chondral defects, male sex, older age, and greater body mass index were significantly associated with an increased failure rate after OCA of the knee. No statistically significant evidence presently exists to support that chondral defect size and location or concomitant procedures are associated with an increased graft failure rate after OCA of the knee. Additional studies are needed to evaluate these associations.

Background: There has been a rapid increase in research applying artificial intelligence (AI) to various subspecialties of orthopaedic surgery, including foot and ankle surgery. The purpose of this systematic review is to (1) characterize the topics and objectives of studies using AI in foot and ankle surgery, (2) evaluate the performance of their models, and (3) evaluate their validity (internal or external validation)., Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases in December 2022. All studies that used AI or its subsets machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) in the setting of foot and ankle surgery relevant to orthopaedic surgeons were included. Studies were evaluated for their demographics, subject area, outcomes of interest, model(s) tested, model(s)' performance, and validity (internal or external)., Results: A total of 31 studies met inclusion criteria: 14 studies investigated AI for image interpretation, 13 studies investigated AI for clinical predictions, and 4 studies were grouped as "other." Studies commonly explored AI for ankle fractures, calcaneus fractures, hallux valgus, Achilles tendon pathologies, plantar fasciitis, and sports injuries. For studies reporting the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), AUCs ranged from 0.64 (poor) to 0.99 (excellent). Two studies (6.45%) reported external validation., Conclusion: Applications of AI in the field of foot and ankle surgery are expanding, particularly for image interpretation and clinical predictions. Current model performances range from poor to excellent, and most studies lack external validation, demonstrating a need for further research prior to deploying AI-based clinical applications., Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. ICMJE forms for all authors are available online., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Background: Routine hip magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before arthroscopy for patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) offers questionable clinical benefit, delays surgery, and wastes resources., Purpose: To assess the clinical utility of preoperative hip MRI for patients aged ≤40 years who were undergoing primary hip arthroscopy and who had a history, physical examination findings, and radiographs concordant with FAIS., Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: Included were 1391 patients (mean age, 25.8 years; 63% female; mean body mass index, 25.6) who underwent hip arthroscopy between August 2015 and December 2021 by 1 of 4 fellowship-trained hip surgeons from 4 referral centers. Inclusion criteria were FAIS, primary surgery, and age ≤40 years. Exclusion criteria were MRI contraindication, reattempt of nonoperative management, and concomitant periacetabular osteotomy. Patients were stratified into those who were evaluated with preoperative MRI versus those without MRI. Those without MRI received an MRI before surgery without deviation from the established surgical plan. All preoperative MRI scans were compared with the office evaluation and intraoperative findings to assess agreement. Time from office to arthroscopy and/or MRI was recorded. MRI costs were calculated., Results: Of the study patients, 322 were not evaluated with MRI and 1069 were. MRI did not alter surgical or interoperative plans. Both groups had MRI findings demonstrating anterosuperior labral tears treated intraoperatively (99.8% repair, 0.2% debridement, and 0% reconstruction). Compared with patients who were evaluated with MRI and waited 63.0 ± 34.6 days, patients who were not evaluated with MRI underwent surgery 6.5 ± 18.7 days after preoperative MRI. MRI delayed surgery by 24.0 ± 5.3 days and cost a mean $2262 per patient., Conclusion: Preoperative MRI did not alter indications for primary hip arthroscopy in patients aged ≤40 years with a history, physical examination findings, and radiographs concordant with FAIS. Rather, MRI delayed surgery and wasted resources. Routine hip MRI acquisition for the younger population with primary FAIS with a typical presentation should be challenged., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflicts of interest or source of funding. P.N.R. has received consulting fees from Pacira Pharmaceuticals. A.P. has received hospitality payments from Medical Device Business Services. A.J.K. has received grant support from DJO and Exactech; consulting fees from Arthrex, Joint Restoration Foundation, and Responsive Arthroscopy; speaking fees from Arthrex; honoraria from Joint Restoration Foundation and Vericel; and royalties from Arthrex. E.C.M. has received education payments from Arthrex and Endo Pharm, consulting fees from Endo Pharm and Smith & Nephew, speaking fees from Smith & Nephew, and hospitality payments from Stryker. J.D.H. has received education payments from Medinc and Smith & Nephew, speaking fees and consulting fees from Smith & Nephew, and hospitality payments from Stryker. B.U.N. has received grant support from Arthrex; education payments from Arthrex, Medwest, and Smith & Nephew; consulting fees from Stryker; and hospitality payments from Medical Device Business Services. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) aims to simulate human intelligence using automated computer algorithms. There has been a rapid increase in research applying AI to various subspecialties of orthopedic surgery, including shoulder surgery. The purpose of this review is to assess the scope and validity of current clinical AI applications in shoulder surgery literature., Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed for all articles published between January 1, 2010 and June 10, 2022. The search query used the terms as follows: (artificial intelligence OR machine learning OR deep learning) AND (shoulder OR shoulder surgery OR rotator cuff) . All studies that examined AI application models in shoulder surgery were included and evaluated for model performance and validation (internal, external, or both)., Results: A total of 45 studies were included in the final analysis. Eighteen studies involved shoulder arthroplasty, 13 rotator cuff, and 14 other areas. Studies applying AI to shoulder surgery primarily involved (1) automated imaging analysis including identifying rotator cuff tears and shoulder implants (2) risk prediction analyses including perioperative complications, functional outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Highest model performance area under the curve ranged from 0.681 (poor) to 1.00 (perfect). Only 2 studies reported external validation., Conclusion: Applications of AI in the field of shoulder surgery are expanding rapidly and offer patient-specific risk stratification for shared decision-making and process automation for resource preservation. However, model performance is modest and external validation remains to be demonstrated, suggesting increased scientific rigor is warranted prior to deploying AI-based clinical applications., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Literature surrounding artificial intelligence (AI)-related applications for hip and knee arthroplasty has proliferated. However, meaningful advances that fundamentally transform the practice and delivery of joint arthroplasty are yet to be realized, despite the broad range of applications as we continue to search for meaningful and appropriate use of AI. AI literature in hip and knee arthroplasty between 2018 and 2021 regarding image-based analyses, value-based care, remote patient monitoring, and augmented reality was reviewed. Concerns surrounding meaningful use and appropriate methodological approaches of AI in joint arthroplasty research are summarized. Of the 233 AI-related orthopaedics articles published, 178 (76%) constituted original research, while the rest consisted of editorials or reviews. A total of 52% of original AI-related research concerns hip and knee arthroplasty (n = 92), and a narrative review is described. Three studies were externally validated. Pitfalls surrounding present-day research include conflating vernacular ("AI/machine learning"), repackaging limited registry data, prematurely releasing internally validated prediction models, appraising model architecture instead of inputted data, withholding code, and evaluating studies using antiquated regression-based guidelines. While AI has been applied to a variety of hip and knee arthroplasty applications with limited clinical impact, the future remains promising if the question is meaningful, the methodology is rigorous and transparent, the data are rich, and the model is externally validated. Simple checkpoints for meaningful AI adoption include ensuring applications focus on: administrative support over clinical evaluation and management; necessity of the advanced model; and the novelty of the question being answered.Cite this article: Bone Joint J  2022;104-B(12):1292-1303.

Purpose: To assess the clinical utility of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and quantify the delay in surgical care for patients aged ≤40 years undergoing primary hip arthroscopy with history, physical examination, and radiographs concordant with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS)., Methods: From August 2015 to December 2020, 1,786 consecutive patients were reviewed from the practice of 1 fellowship-trained hip arthroscopist. Inclusion criteria were FAIS, primary surgery, and age ≤40 years. Exclusion criteria were MRI contraindication, reattempt of conservative management, or concomitant periacetabular osteotomy. After nonoperative treatment options were exhausted and a surgical plan was established, patients were stratified by those who presented with versus without MRI. Those without existing MRI received one, and any deviations from the surgical plan were noted. All preoperative MRIs were compared with office evaluation and intraoperative findings to assess agreement. Demographic data, Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS)-Pain, and time from office to MRI or arthroscopy were recorded., Results: Of the patients indicated by history, physical examination, and radiographs alone (70% female, body mass index 24.8 kg/m 2 , age 25.9 years), 198 patients presented without MRI and 934 with MRI. None of the 198 had surgical plans altered after MRI. Patients in both groups had MRI findings demonstrating anterosuperior labral tears that were visualized and repaired intraoperatively. Mean time from office to arthroscopy for patients without MRI versus those with was 107.0 ± 67 and 85.0 ± 53 days, respectively (P < .001). Time to MRI was 22.8 days. No difference between groups was observed among the 85% of patients who surpassed the HOOS-Pain minimal clinically important difference (MCID)., Conclusion: Once indicated for surgery based on history, physical examination, and radiographs, preoperative MRI did not alter the surgical plan for patients aged ≤40 years with FAIS undergoing primary hip arthroscopy. Moreover, preoperative MRI delayed time to arthroscopy. The necessity of routine preoperative MRI in the young primary FAIS population should be challenged., (Copyright © 2022 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There exists great hope and hype in the literature surrounding applications of artificial intelligence (AI) to orthopaedic surgery. Between 2018 and 2021, a total of 178 AI-related articles were published in orthopaedics. However, for every 2 original research papers that apply AI to orthopaedics, a commentary or review is published (30.3%). AI-related research in orthopaedics frequently fails to provide use cases that offer the uninitiated an opportunity to appraise the importance of AI by studying meaningful questions, evaluating unknown hypotheses, or analyzing quality data. The hype perpetuates a feed-forward cycle that relegates AI to a meaningless buzzword by rewarding those with nascent understanding and rudimentary technical knowhow into committing several basic errors: (1) inappropriately conflating vernacular ("AI/machine learning"), (2) repackaging registry data, (3) prematurely releasing internally validated algorithms, (4) overstating the "black box phenomenon" by failing to provide weighted analysis, (5) claiming to evaluate AI rather than the data itself, and (6) withholding full model architecture code. Relevant AI-specific guidelines are forthcoming, but forced application of the original Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis guidelines designed for regression analyses is irrelevant and misleading. To safeguard meaningful use, AI-related research efforts in orthopaedics should be (1) directed toward administrative support over clinical evaluation and management, (2) require the use of the advanced model, and (3) answer a question that was previously unknown, unanswered, or unquantifiable., (Copyright © 2022 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Hypothesis: Although shoulder and elbow injuries in professional baseball players have been thoroughly studied, little is known about the frequency and impact of pectoralis muscle injuries in this population. The purpose of this study was to use the official league injury surveillance system to describe pectoralis muscle injuries in professional baseball players in Major League Baseball (MLB) and Minor League Baseball (MiLB). Specifically, (1) player demographic characteristics, (2) return to play (RTP), (3) injury mechanism, (4) throwing- and batting-side dominance, and (5) injury rate per athlete exposure (AE) were characterized to guide future injury prevention strategies., Methods: The MLB Health and Injury Tracking System database was used to compile all pectoralis muscle injuries in MLB and MiLB athletes in the 2011-2017 seasons. Injury-related data including diagnosis (tear or rupture vs. strain), player demographic characteristics, injury timing, need for surgical intervention, RTP, and mechanism of injury were recorded. Subanalyses of throwing- and batting-side dominance, as well as MLB vs. MiLB injury frequency, were performed., Results: A total of 138 pectoralis muscle injuries (32 MLB and 106 MiLB injuries) were reported in the study period (5 tears or ruptures and 133 strains), with 5 of these being recurrent injuries. Operative intervention was performed in 4 athletes (2.9%). Of the 138 injuries, 116 (84.1%) resulted in missed days of play, with a mean time to RTP of 19.5 days. Starting pitchers sustained the greatest proportion of pectoralis injuries (48.1%), with pitching being the most common activity at the time of injury (45.9%). A majority of injuries (86.5%) were sustained during non-contact play. Overall, 87.5% of injuries occurred on the player's dominant throwing side and 81.3% occurred on the player's dominant batting side. There was no significant difference in the rate of pectoralis injuries in the MLB regular season (0.584 per 10,000 AEs) vs. the MiLB regular season (0.425 per 10,000 AEs) (P = .1018)., Conclusion: Pectoralis muscle injuries are most frequently non-contact injuries, most commonly sustained by pitchers. An understanding of these injuries can guide athletic trainers and management in expectation management and decision making, in addition to directing future efforts at injury prevention., (Copyright © 2022 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Psoriasis is a dermatologic condition characterized by erythematous plaques that may increase wound complications and deep infections following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). There is a paucity of evidence concerning the association of this disease and complications after TKA. This study aimed to determine if patients who have psoriasis vs non-psoriatic patients have differences in demographics and various comorbidities as well as post-operative infections, specifically the following: (1) wound complications; (2) cellulitic episodes; and (3) deep surgical site infections (SSIs)., Methods: We identified 10,727 patients undergoing primary TKA utilizing an institutional database between January 1, 2017 and April 1, 2019. A total of 133 patients who had psoriasis (1.2%) were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes and compared to non-psoriatic patients. The rate of wound complications, cellulitic episodes, and deep SSIs were determined. After controlling for age and various comorbidities, multivariate analyses were performed to identify the associated risks for post-operative infections., Results: Psoriasis patients showed an increased associated risk of deep SSIs (3.8%) compared to non-psoriasis patients (1.2%, P = .023). Multivariate analyses demonstrated a significant associated risk of deep SSIs (odds ratio 7.04, 95% confidence interval 2.38-20.9, P < .001) and wound complications (odds ratio 4.44, 95% confidence interval 1.02-19.2, P = .047)., Conclusion: Psoriasis is an inflammatory dermatologic condition that warrants increased pre-operative counseling, shared decision-making, and infectious precautions in the TKA population given the increased risk of wound complications and deep SSIs. Increased vigilance is required given the coexistence of certain comorbidities with this population, including depression, substance use disorder, smoking history, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and inflammatory bowel disease., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the cost of the episode of care for primary rotator cuff repair (RCR) from day of surgery to 90 days postoperatively using the time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) method. The secondary purpose of this study was to identify the main drivers of cost for both phases of care., Methods: This retrospective case series study used the TDABC method to determine the bundled cost of care for an RCR. First, a process map of the RCR episode of care was constructed in order to determine drivers of fixed (i.e., rent, power), direct variable (i.e., healthcare personnel), and indirect costs (i.e., marketing, building maintenance). The study was performed at a Midwestern tertiary care medical system, and patients were included in the study if they underwent an RCR from January 2018 to January 2019 with at least 90 days of postoperative follow-up. In this article, all costs were included, but we did not account for fees to provider and professional groups., Results: The TDABC method calculated a cost of $10,569 for a bundled RCR, with 76% arising from the operative phase and 24% from the postoperative phase. The main driver of cost within the operative phase was the direct fixed costs, which accounted for 35% of the cost in this phase, and the largest contributor to cost within this category was the cost of implants, which accounted for 55%. In the postoperative phase of care, physical therapy visits were the greatest contributor to cost at 59%., Conclusion: In a bundled cost of care for RCR, the largest cost driver occurs on the day of surgery for direct fixed costs, in particular, the implant. Physical therapy represents over half of the costs of the episode of care. Better understanding the specific cost of care for RCR will facilitate optimization with appropriately designed payment models and policies that safeguard the interests of the patient, physician, and payer., Level of Evidence: IV, therapeutic case series., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Artificial intelligence (AI) represents the fourth industrial revolution and the next frontier in medicine poised to transform the field of orthopaedics and sports medicine, though widespread understanding of the fundamental principles and adoption of applications remain nascent. Recent research efforts into implementation of AI in the field of orthopaedic surgery and sports medicine have demonstrated great promise in predicting athlete injury risk, interpreting advanced imaging, evaluating patient-reported outcomes, reporting value-based metrics, and augmenting the patient experience. Not unlike the recent emphasis thrust upon physicians to understand the business of medicine, the future practice of sports medicine specialists will require a fundamental working knowledge of the strengths, limitations, and applications of AI-based tools. With appreciation, caution, and experience applying AI to sports medicine, the potential to automate tasks and improve data-driven insights may be realized to fundamentally improve patient care. In this Current Concepts review, we discuss the definitions, strengths, limitations, and applications of AI from the current literature as it relates to orthopaedic sports medicine.

Background: The number of patients requiring reoperation has increased as the volume of hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) has increased. The factors most important in determining patients who are likely to require reoperation remain elusive., Purpose: To leverage machine learning to better characterize the complex relationship across various preoperative factors (patient characteristics, radiographic parameters, patient-reported outcome measures [PROMs]) for patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS to determine which features predict the need for future ipsilateral hip reoperation, namely, revision hip arthroscopy, total hip arthroplasty (THA), hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), or periacetabular osteotomy (PAO)., Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: A cohort of 3147 patients undergoing 3748 primary hip arthroscopy procedures were included from an institutional hip preservation registry. Preoperative computed tomography of the hip was obtained for each patient, from which the following parameters were calculated: the alpha angle; the coronal center-edge angle; the neck-shaft angle; the acetabular version angle at 1, 2, and 3 o'clock; and the femoral version angle. Preoperative PROMs included the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living subscale (HOS-ADL) and the Sport Specific subscale, and the international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Random forest models were created for revision hip arthroscopy, the THA, the HRA, and the PAO. Area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic curve and accuracy were calculated to evaluate each model., Results: A total of 171 patients (4.6%) underwent subsequent hip surgery after primary hip arthroscopy for FAIS. The AUC and accuracy, respectively, were 0.77 (fair) and 76% for revision hip arthroscopy (mean, 26.4-month follow-up); 0.80 (good) and 81% for THA (mean, 32.5-month follow-up); 0.62 (poor) and 69% for HRA (mean, 45.4-month follow-up); and 0.76 (fair) and 74% for PAO (mean, 30.4-month follow-up). The most important factors in predicting reoperation after primary hip arthroscopy were higher body mass index (BMI) and lower preoperative HOS-ADL for revision hip arthroscopy, greater age and lower preoperative iHOT-33 for THA, increased BMI for HRA, and larger neck-shaft angle and lower preoperative mHHS for PAO., Conclusion: Despite the low failure rate of hip arthroscopy for FAIS, our study demonstrated that machine learning has the capability to identify key preoperative risk factors that may predict subsequent ipsilateral hip surgery before the index hip arthroscopy. Knowledge of these demographic, radiographic, and patient-reported outcome data may aid in preoperative counseling and expectation management to better optimize hip preservation.

Background: Fresh osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA) is an effective method of treating symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee. This restoration technique involves the single-stage implantation of viable, mature hyaline cartilage into a chondral or osteochondral lesion. The extent to which preoperative imaging and patient factors predict achieving clinically meaningful outcomes among patients undergoing OCA for cartilage lesions of the knee remains unknown., Purpose: To determine the predictive relationship of preoperative imaging, preoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and patient demographics with achievement of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for functional and quality-of-life PROMs at 2 years after OCA for symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee., Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: Data were analyzed for patients who underwent OCA before May 1, 2018, by 2 high-volume fellowship-trained cartilage surgeons. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective form, Knee Outcome Survey-Activities of Daily Living (KOS-ADL), and mental and physical component summaries of the SF-36 were administered preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. A total of 42 predictive models were created using 7 unique architectures to detect achievement of the MCID for each of the 4 outcome measures and the SCB for the IKDC and KOS-ADL. Data inputted into the models included sex, age, body mass index, baseline PROMs, lesion size, concomitant ligamentous or meniscal tear, and presence of "bone bruise" or osseous edema. Shapley additive explanations plot analysis identified predictors of reaching the MCID and SCB., Results: Of the 185 patients who underwent OCA for the knee and met eligibility criteria from an institutional cartilage registry, 153 (83%) had 2-year follow-up. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), baseline PROMs, and patient demographics best predicted reaching the 2-year MCID and SCB of the IKDC and KOS-ADL PROMs, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the top-performing models ranging from good (0.88) to excellent (0.91). MRI faired poorly (areas under the curve, 0.60-0.68) in predicting the MCID for the mental and physical component summaries. Higher body mass index, knee malalignment, absence of preoperative osseous edema, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament or meniscal injury, larger defect size, and the implantation of >1 OCA graft were consistent findings contributing to failure to achieve the MCID or SCB at 2 years postoperatively., Conclusion: Our machine learning models demonstrated that preoperative MRI, baseline PROMs, and patient demographics reliably predict the ability to reach clinically meaningful thresholds for functional knee outcomes 2 years after OCA for cartilage defects. Although clinical improvement in knee function can be reliably predicted, improvements in quality of life after OCA depend on a comprehensive preoperative assessment of the patient's perception of his or her mental and physical health. Absence of osseous edema, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament or meniscal injury, larger lesion size on MRI, knee malalignment, and elevated body mass index are predictive of failure to achieve 2-year functional benefits after OCA of the knee.

Background: The surgical management of complications surrounding patients who have undergone hip arthroplasty necessitates accurate identification of the femoral implant manufacturer and model. Failure to do so risks delays in care, increased morbidity, and further economic burden. Because few arthroplasty experts can confidently classify implants using plain radiographs, automated image processing using deep learning for implant identification may offer an opportunity to improve the value of care rendered., Methods: We trained, validated, and externally tested a deep-learning system to classify total hip arthroplasty and hip resurfacing arthroplasty femoral implants as one of 18 different manufacturer models from 1972 retrospectively collected anterior-posterior (AP) plain radiographs from 4 sites in one quaternary referral health system. From these radiographs, 1559 were used for training, 207 for validation, and 206 for external testing. Performance was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy, as compared with a reference standard of implant model from operative reports with implant serial numbers., Results: The training and validation data sets from 1715 patients and 1766 AP radiographs included 18 different femoral components across four leading implant manufacturers and 10 fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons. After 1000 training epochs by the deep-learning system, the system discriminated 18 implant models with an area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of 0.999, accuracy of 99.6%, sensitivity of 94.3%, and specificity of 99.8% in the external-testing data set of 206 AP radiographs., Conclusions: A deep-learning system using AP plain radiographs accurately differentiated among 18 hip arthroplasty models from four industry leading manufacturers., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Artificial intelligence (AI), including machine learning (ML), has transformed numerous industries through newfound efficiencies and supportive decision-making. With the exponential growth of computing power and large datasets, AI has transitioned from theory to reality in teaching machines to automate tasks without human supervision. AI-based computational algorithms analyze "training sets" using pattern recognition and learning from inputted data to classify and predict outputs that otherwise could not be effectively analyzed with human processing or standard statistical methods. Though widespread understanding of the fundamental principles and adoption of applications have yet to be achieved, recent applications and research efforts implementing AI have demonstrated great promise in predicting future injury risk, interpreting advanced imaging, evaluating patient-reported outcomes, reporting value-based metrics, and augmenting telehealth. With appreciation, caution, and experience applying AI, the potential to automate tasks and improve data-driven insights may be realized to fundamentally improve patient care. The purpose of this review is to discuss the pearls, pitfalls, and applications associated with AI., (Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Artificial intelligence (AI), along with its subset technology machine learning, has transformed numerous industries through newfound efficiencies and supportive decision-making. These technologies have similarly begun to find application within United States healthcare, particularly orthopaedics. Although these modalities have the potential to similarly transform health care, there exist limitations that must also be recognized and understood. Unfortunately, most clinicians do not have an understanding of the fundamentals of AI and therefore may have challenges in contextualizing its impact in modern healthcare. The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of the key concepts of AI and machine learning with the orthopaedic surgeon in mind. The review further highlights the potential benefits and limitations of AI, along with an overview of its applications, in orthopaedics., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.)

Background: Revisions and reoperations for patients who have undergone total knee arthroplasty (TKA), unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), and distal femoral replacement (DFR) necessitates accurate identification of implant manufacturer and model. Failure risks delays in care, increased morbidity, and further financial burden. Deep learning permits automated image processing to mitigate the challenges behind expeditious, cost-effective preoperative planning. Our aim was to investigate whether a deep-learning algorithm could accurately identify the manufacturer and model of arthroplasty implants about the knee from plain radiographs., Methods: We trained, validated, and externally tested a deep-learning algorithm to classify knee arthroplasty implants from one of 9 different implant models from retrospectively collected anterior-posterior (AP) plain radiographs from four sites in one quaternary referral health system. The performance was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy when compared with a reference standard of implant model from operative reports., Results: The training and validation data sets were comprised of 682 radiographs across 424 patients and included a wide range of TKAs from the four leading implant manufacturers. After 1000 training epochs by the deep-learning algorithm, the model discriminated nine implant models with an AUC of 0.99, accuracy 99%, sensitivity of 95%, and specificity of 99% in the external-testing data set of 74 radiographs., Conclusions: A deep learning algorithm using plain radiographs differentiated between 9 unique knee arthroplasty implants from four manufacturers with near-perfect accuracy. The iterative capability of the algorithm allows for scalable expansion of implant discriminations and represents an opportunity in delivering cost-effective care for revision arthroplasty., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Fresh osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA) is an effective method of treating symptomatic cartilage defects of the knee. This cartilage restoration technique involves the single-stage implantation of viable, mature hyaline cartilage into the chondral or osteochondral lesion. Predictive models for reaching the clinically meaningful outcome among patients undergoing OCA for cartilage lesions of the knee remain under investigation., Purpose: To apply machine learning to determine which preoperative variables are predictive for achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) at 1 and 2 years after OCA for cartilage lesions of the knee., Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: Data were analyzed for patients who underwent OCA of the knee by 2 high-volume fellowship-trained cartilage surgeons before May 1, 2018. The International Knee Documentation Committee questionnaire (IKDC), Knee Outcome Survey-Activities of Daily Living (KOS-ADL), and Mental Component (MCS) and Physical Component (PCS) Summaries of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were administered preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. A total of 84 predictive models were created using 7 unique architectures to detect achievement of the MCID for each of the 4 outcome measures and the SCB for the IKDC and KOS-ADL at both time points. Data inputted into the models included previous and concomitant surgical history, laterality, sex, age, body mass index (BMI), intraoperative findings, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Shapley Additive Explanations (SHAP) analysis identified predictors of reaching the MCID and SCB., Results: Of the 185 patients who underwent OCA for the knee and met eligibility criteria from an institutional cartilage registry, 135 (73%) patients were available for the 1-year follow-up and 153 (83%) patients for the 2-year follow-up. In predicting outcomes after OCA in terms of the IKDC, KOS-ADL, MCS, and PCS at 1 and 2 years, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) of the top-performing models ranged from fair (0.72) to excellent (0.94). Lower baseline mental health (MCS), higher baseline physical health (PCS) and knee function scores (KOS-ADL, IKDC Subjective), lower baseline activity demand (Marx, Cincinnati sports), worse pain symptoms (Cincinnati pain, SF-36 pain), and higher BMI were thematic predictors contributing to failure to achieve the MCID or SCB at 1 and 2 years postoperatively., Conclusion: Our machine learning models were effective in predicting outcomes and elucidating the relationships between baseline factors contributing to achieving the MCID for OCA of the knee. Patients who preoperatively report poor mental health, catastrophize pain symptoms, compensate with higher physical health and knee function, and exhibit lower activity demands are at risk for failing to reach clinically meaningful outcomes after OCA of the knee.

Purpose: The primary purpose of this study was to compare the cost of care of one of the most common sports medicine surgical procedures, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), using the time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) method to traditional accounting methods such as activity-based costing (ABC). Our secondary purpose was to identify the main drivers of the cost of ACLR using both of these techniques., Methods: A process map of ACLR was constructed through direct observation in the clinical setting according to established techniques to identify drivers of fixed, direct variable, and indirect costs. An episode of care consisted of each step in the surgical process from admission to discharge. Personnel costs were combined with the process map to determine the cost drivers and overall cost of the procedure. The cost generated from the TDABC method was compared with the cost from our institution's internal accounting system, which used an ABC method., Results: The total cost of ACLR was $5,242.25 when using TDABC versus $10,318 when using the traditional ABC method. The largest difference between the 2 methods was within the domain of direct variable costs., Conclusions: When compared with TDABC, the hospital's traditional cost-accounting estimate for ACLR is nearly twice as costly. These findings highlight the variability of cost calculation for the same clinical episode between the 2 accounting methods. For the traditional accounting method, the direct variable cost was the main cost driver, whereas for the TDABC method, the direct fixed cost was the main cost driver., Clinical Relevance: This study is important because it elucidates important cost drivers for one of the most common sports medicine orthopaedic surgical procedures and attempts to identify the true overall cost of the procedure., (© 2020 Published by Elsevier on behalf of the Arthroscopy Association of North America.)

Background: Shoulder injuries account for a large portion of all recorded injuries in professional baseball. Much is known about other shoulder pathologies in the overhead athlete, but the incidence and impact of acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries in this population are unknown. We examined the epidemiology of AC joint injuries in Major League Baseball (MLB) and Minor League Baseball (MiLB) players and determined the impact on time missed., Methods: The MLB Health and Injury Tracking System was used to compile records of all MLB and MiLB players from 2011 to 2017 with documented AC joint injuries. These injuries were classified as acute (sprain or separation) or chronic (AC joint arthritis or distal clavicular osteolysis), and associated data extracted included laterality, date of injury, player position, activity, mechanism of injury, length of return to play, and need for surgical intervention., Results: A total of 312 AC joint injuries (183 in MiLB players and 129 in MLB players; range, 39-60 per year) were recorded: 201 acute (64.4%) and 111 chronic (35.6%). A total of 81% of acute and 59% of chronic injuries resulted in time missed, with a mean length of return to play of 21 days for both. Of the injuries in outfielders, 79.6% were acute (P < .0001), as were 66.3% of injuries in infielders (P = .004). Pitchers and catchers had more equal proportions of acute and chronic AC injuries (P > .05 for all). Acute AC injuries occurred most often while fielding (n = 100, 84.7%), running (n = 25, 80.6%), and hitting (n = 19, 61.3%), whereas chronic injuries tended to be more common while pitching (n = 26, 68.4%). Of contact injuries, 82.5% were acute (P < .0001), whereas 59.0% of noncontact injuries were chronic (P = .047). MLB players showed consistently higher regular-season rates of both acute and chronic AC injuries than MiLB players (P < .0001 for each)., Conclusion: Acute AC joint injuries are contact injuries occurring most commonly among infielders and outfielders while fielding that result in 3 weeks missed before return to play, whereas chronic AC joint injuries occur more commonly in pitchers and catchers from noncontact repetitive overhead activity. Knowledge of these data can better guide expectation management in this elite population to better elucidate the prevalence of 2 common injury patterns in the AC joint., (Copyright © 2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Machine learning (ML) allows for the development of a predictive algorithm capable of imbibing historical data on a Major League Baseball (MLB) player to accurately project the player's future availability., Purpose: To determine the validity of an ML model in predicting the next-season injury risk and anatomic injury location for both position players and pitchers in the MLB., Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study., Methods: Using 4 online baseball databases, we compiled MLB player data, including age, performance metrics, and injury history. A total of 84 ML algorithms were developed. The output of each algorithm reported whether the player would sustain an injury the following season as well as the injury's anatomic site. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) primarily determined validation., Results: Player data were generated from 1931 position players and 1245 pitchers, with a mean follow-up of 4.40 years (13,982 player-years) between the years of 2000 and 2017. Injured players spent a total of 108,656 days on the disabled list, with a mean of 34.21 total days per player. The mean AUC for predicting next-season injuries was 0.76 among position players and 0.65 among pitchers using the top 3 ensemble classification. Back injuries had the highest AUC among both position players and pitchers, at 0.73. Advanced ML models outperformed logistic regression in 13 of 14 cases., Conclusion: Advanced ML models generally outperformed logistic regression and demonstrated fair capability in predicting publicly reportable next-season injuries, including the anatomic region for position players, although not for pitchers., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflicts of interest or source of funding: P.M.S. has received educational support from Arthrex, consulting fees from DJO and DePuy, nonconsulting fees from Arthrex, and hospitality payments from the Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation. S.J.F. has received grant payments from Arthrex and DJO and educational support from Arthrex and Rock Medical. K.L.S. has received educational support from Arthrex; consulting fees from Molnlycke Health Care; nonconsulting fees from Horizon Pharma; honoraria from Fidia Pharma; and hospitality payments from Biomet Orthopedics, the Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation, Ramsay Medical, and Stryker. L.D.F. has received consulting fees from Zimmer Biomet and hospitality payments from the Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation. B.U.N. has received educational support from Smith & Nephew and hospitality payments from Stryker, Wright Medical, and Zimmer Biomet. N.N.V. has received educational support from Medwest; consulting fees from Arthrex, Medacta, and Smith & Nephew; nonconsulting fees from Arthrex and Smith & Nephew; and royalties from Smith & Nephew. E.C.M. has received educational support from Pinnacle (Arthrex), consulting fees from Smith & Nephew, and hospitality payments from Stryker. M.S.S. has received consulting fees and nonconsulting fees from Arthrex. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Hypothesis/purpose: The objective is to develop and validate an artificial intelligence model, specifically an artificial neural network (ANN), to predict length of stay (LOS), discharge disposition, and inpatient charges for primary anatomic total (aTSA), reverse total (rTSA), and hemi- (HSA) shoulder arthroplasty to establish internal validity in predicting patient-specific value metrics., Methods: Using data from the National Inpatient Sample between 2003 and 2014, 4 different ANN models to predict LOS, discharge disposition, and inpatient costs using 39 preoperative variables were developed based on diagnosis and arthroplasty type: primary chronic/degenerative aTSA, primary chronic/degenerative rTSA, primary traumatic/acute rTSA, and primary acute/traumatic HSA. Models were also combined into diagnosis type only. Outcome metrics included accuracy and area under the curve (AUC) for a receiver operating characteristic curve., Results: A total of 111,147 patients undergoing primary shoulder replacement were included. The machine learning algorithm predicting the overall chronic/degenerative conditions model (aTSA, rTSA) achieved accuracies of 76.5%, 91.8%, and 73.1% for total cost, LOS, and disposition, respectively; AUCs were 0.75, 0.89, and 0.77 for total cost, LOS, and disposition, respectively. The overall acute/traumatic conditions model (rTSA, HSA) had accuracies of 70.3%, 79.1%, and 72.0% and AUCs of 0.72, 0.78, and 0.79 for total cost, LOS, and discharge disposition, respectively., Conclusion: Our ANN demonstrated fair to good accuracy and reliability for predicting inpatient cost, LOS, and discharge disposition in shoulder arthroplasty for both chronic/degenerative and acute/traumatic conditions. Machine learning has the potential to preoperatively predict costs, LOS, and disposition using patient-specific data for expectation management between health care providers, patients, and payers., (Copyright © 2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The relationship between the preoperative radiographic indices for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) and postoperative patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores continues to be under investigation, with inconsistent findings reported., Purpose: To apply a machine learning model to determine which preoperative radiographic indices, if any, among patients indicated for the arthroscopic correction of FAIS predict whether a patient will achieve the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for 1- and 2-year PROM scores., Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: A total of 1735 consecutive patients undergoing primary hip arthroscopic surgery for FAIS were included from an institutional hip preservation registry. Patients underwent preoperative computed tomography of the hip, from which the following radiographic indices were calculated by a musculoskeletal radiologist: alpha angle, beta angle, sagittal center-edge angle, coronal center-edge angle, neck shaft angle, acetabular version angle, and femoral version angle. PROM scores were collected preoperatively, at 1 year postoperatively, and at 2 years postoperatively for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and -Sport Specific (HOS-SS), and the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Random forest models were created for each PROM at 1 and 2 years' follow-up, with each PROM's MCID used to establish clinical meaningfulness. Data inputted into the models included ethnicity, laterality, sex, age, body mass index, and radiographic indices. Comprehensive and separate models were built specifically to assess the association of the alpha angle, femoral version angle, coronal center-edge angle, McKibbin index, and hip impingement index with respect to each PROM., Results: As evidenced by poor area under the curves and P values >.05 for each model created, no combination of radiographic indices or isolated index (alpha angle, coronal center-edge angle, femoral version angle, McKibbin index, hip impingement index) was a significant predictor of a clinically meaningful improvement in scores on the mHHS, HOS-ADL, HOS-SS, or iHOT-33. The mean difference between 1- and 2-year PROM scores compared with preoperative values exceeded the respective MCIDs for the cohort., Conclusion: In patients appropriately indicated for FAIS corrective surgery, clinical improvements can be achieved, regardless of preoperative radiographic indices, such as the femoral version angle, coronal center-edge angle, and alpha angle. No specific radiographic parameter or combination of indices was found to be predictive of reaching the MCID for any of the 4 studied hip-specific PROMs at either 1 or 2 years' follow-up.

Background: The opportunity to quantitatively predict next-season injury risk in the National Hockey League (NHL) has become a reality with the advent of advanced computational processors and machine learning (ML) architecture. Unlike static regression analyses that provide a momentary prediction, ML algorithms are dynamic in that they are readily capable of imbibing historical data to build a framework that improves with additive data., Purpose: To (1) characterize the epidemiology of publicly reported NHL injuries from 2007 to 2017, (2) determine the validity of a machine learning model in predicting next-season injury risk for both goalies and position players, and (3) compare the performance of modern ML algorithms versus logistic regression (LR) analyses., Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study., Methods: Professional NHL player data were compiled for the years 2007 to 2017 from 2 publicly reported databases in the absence of an official NHL-approved database. Attributes acquired from each NHL player from each professional year included age, 85 performance metrics, and injury history. A total of 5 ML algorithms were created for both position player and goalie data: random forest, K Nearest Neighbors, Naïve Bayes, XGBoost, and Top 3 Ensemble. LR was also performed for both position player and goalie data. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) primarily determined validation., Results: Player data were generated from 2109 position players and 213 goalies. For models predicting next-season injury risk for position players, XGBoost performed the best with an AUC of 0.948, compared with an AUC of 0.937 for LR ( P < .0001). For models predicting next-season injury risk for goalies, XGBoost had the highest AUC with 0.956, compared with an AUC of 0.947 for LR ( P < .0001)., Conclusion: Advanced ML models such as XGBoost outperformed LR and demonstrated good to excellent capability of predicting whether a publicly reportable injury is likely to occur the next season., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflicts of interest or source of funding: Internal funding for this study was provided by the Cleveland Clinic. M.S.S. has received educational support, consulting fees, and speaking fees from Arthrex. E.C.M. has received educational support from Pinnacle (Arthrex), consulting fees from Smith & Nephew, hospitality payments from Smith & Nephew and Stryker, and publishing royalties from Springer. B.U.N. has received educational support from Smith & Nephew and hospitality payments from Wright Medical and Zimmer Biomet. R.J.W. has received consulting fees from Arthrex. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

There has been an exponential increase in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with femoroacetabular impingement, leading to a rise in the number of hip arthroscopies done annually. Despite reliable pain relief and functional improvements after hip arthroscopy in properly indicated patients, and due to these increased numbers, there is a growing number of patients who have persistent pain after surgery. The etiology of these continued symptoms is multifactorial, and clinicians must have a fundamental understanding of these causes to properly diagnose and manage these patients. Factors contributing to failure after surgery include those related to the patient, the surgeon, and the postoperative physical therapy. This review highlights common causes of failure, including those related to residual bony deformity as well as capsular deficiency, and provides a framework for diagnosis and treatment of these patients.

Background: Studies have shown high-volume surgeons and hospitals deliver higher value care. The aims of this study were to establish meaningful thresholds defining high-volume surgeons and hospitals performing hip fracture surgery and to examine the relative market share of hip fracture cases using these surgeon and hospital strata., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study in a database of 103,935 patients undergoing hip fracture repair. We generated stratum-specific likelihood ratio (SSLR) models of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve using length of stay (LOS) and cost value metrics. Volume thresholds predictive of decreased LOS and costs for surgeons and hospitals were identified., Results: Analysis of annual surgeon hip fracture volume produced two volume categories for LOS and cost: 0-30 (low) and 31+ (high). Analysis of LOS by annual hospital hip fracture volume produced strata at: 0-59 (low), 60-146 (medium), and 147 or more (high). Analysis of cost by annual hospital volume produced strata at: 0-125 (low) and 126+ (high). LOS and cost both decreased significantly ( p  < 0.05) in progressively higher volume categories. Low-volume surgeons performed the majority of hip fracture cases, although they were performed at medium- or high-volume centres., Conclusions: This study demonstrates a direct relationship between volume and value, translating to improvement in hip fracture care delivery for both surgeons and hospitals. Higher volume hospitals while lower volume surgeons perform the majority of hip fracture cases, suggesting optimisation opportunities. However, systems-based practices at the hospital level likely drive value to a greater extent than individual surgeons.

Background Context: With the increasing emphasis on value-based healthcare in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement structures, bundled payment models have been adopted for many orthopedic procedures. Immense variability of patients across hospitals and providers makes these models potentially less viable in spine surgery. Machine-learning models have been shown reliable at predicting patient-specific outcomes following lumbar spine surgery and could, therefore, be applied to developing stratified bundled payment schemes., Purpose: (1) Can a Naïve Bayes machine-learning model accurately predict inpatient payments, length of stay (LOS), and discharge disposition, following dorsal and lumbar fusion? (2) Can such a model then be used to develop a risk-stratified payment scheme?, Study Design: A Naïve Bayes machine-learning model was constructed using an administrative database., Patient Sample: Patients undergoing dorsal and lumbar fusion for nondeformity indications from 2009 through 2016 were included. Preoperative inputs included age group, gender, ethnicity, race, type of admission, All Patients Refined (APR) risk of mortality, APR severity of illness, and Clinical Classifications Software diagnosis code., Outcome Measures: Predicted resource utilization outcomes included LOS, discharge disposition, and total inpatient payments. Model validation was addressed via reliability, model output quality, and decision speed, based on application of training and validation sets. Risk-stratified payment models were developed according to APR risk of mortality and severity of illness., Results: A Naïve Bayes machine-learning algorithm with adaptive boosting demonstrated high reliability and area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve of 0.880, 0.941, and 0.906 for cost, LOS, and discharge disposition, respectively. Patients with increased risk of mortality or severity of illness incurred costs resulting in greater inpatient payments in a patient-specific tiered bundled payment, reflecting increased risk on institutions caring for these patients. We found that a large range in expected payments due to individuals' preoperative comorbidities indicating an individualized risk-based model is warranted., Conclusions: A Naïve Bayes machine-learning model was shown to have good-to-excellent reliability and responsiveness for cost, LOS, and discharge disposition. Based on APR risk of mortality and APR severity of illness, there was a significant difference in episode costs from lowest to highest risk strata. After using normalized model error to develop a risk-adjusted proposed payment plan, it was found that institutions incur significantly more financial risk in flat bundled payment models for patients with higher rates of comorbidities., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: With the unprecedented advancement of data aggregation and deep learning algorithms, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are poised to transform the practice of medicine. The field of orthopedics, in particular, is uniquely suited to harness the power of big data, and in doing so provide critical insight into elevating the many facets of care provided by orthopedic surgeons. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate the recent and novel literature regarding ML in the field of orthopedics and to address its potential impact on the future of musculoskeletal care., Recent Findings: Recent literature demonstrates that the incorporation of ML into orthopedics has the potential to elevate patient care through alternative patient-specific payment models, rapidly analyze imaging modalities, and remotely monitor patients. Just as the business of medicine was once considered outside the domain of the orthopedic surgeon, we report evidence that demonstrates these emerging applications of AI warrant ownership, leverage, and application by the orthopedic surgeon to better serve their patients and deliver optimal, value-based care.