Search

Risk factors for recurrent instability are present and identifiable preoperatively and can be incorporated into a severity scoring system to help with patient selection. The Instability Severity Index (ISI) Score is a tool used to preoperatively identify patients at risk of failure after an arthroscopic Bankart procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. This 10-point score is also designed to help guide the treating surgeon's decision on whether a soft-tissue stabilization or bone block augmentation procedure is indicated. The ISI scoring system has been criticized for its lack of generalizability outside of the French health care system. However, evidence has emerged establishing the ISI Score as a valuable tool with excellent external validity. The ISI scoring system, based on factors derived from a preoperative questionnaire, physical examination, and imaging studies, is helpful to distinguish between patients who will benefit from an arthroscopic Bankart procedure and those who will not. The higher the score, the higher the risk of recurrence of instability. Patients with an ISI Score of 3 points or less may attain very good results with an arthroscopic Bankart procedure compared with patients with an ISI Score of more than 3 points. Performing this procedure in patients with an ISI Score of more than 6 points leads to an increased risk of recurrence (≥50%) within 5 years and is totally inacceptable. We believe that the information gained from this scoring system will help surgeons in their daily practice to not only decide the right procedure for the right patient but also inform their patients preoperatively of the risks and benefits of an arthroscopic Bankart procedure. As such, the ISI Score is an important strategic tool for shoulder surgeons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: When considering the "joint as an organ", the tissues in a joint act as complementary components of an organ, and the "set point" is the cellular activity for homeostasis of the joint tissues. Even in the absence of injury, joint tissues have adaptive responses to processes, like aging and menopause, which result in changes to the set point. Purpose: The purpose of this study in a preclinical model was to investigate age-related and menopause-related changes in knee-joint tissues with the hypothesis that tissues will change in unique ways that reflect their differing contributions to maintaining joint function (as measured by joint laxity) and the differing processes of aging and menopause. Methods: Rabbit knee-joint tissues from three groups were evaluated: young adult (gene expression, n=8; joint laxity, n=7; water content, n=8), aging adult (gene expression, n=6; joint laxity, n=7; water content, n=5), and menopausal adult (gene expression, n=8; joint laxity, n=7; water content, n=8). Surgical menopause was induced with ovariohysterectomy surgery and gene expression was assessed using reverse-transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Results: Aging resulted in changes to 37 of the 150 gene-tissue combinations evaluated, and menopause resulted in changes to 39 of the 150. Despite the similar number of changes, only eleven changes were the same in both aging and menopause. No differences in joint laxity were detected comparing young adult rabbits with aging adult rabbits or with menopausal adult rabbits. Conclusion: Aging and menopause affected the gene-expression patterns of the tissues of the knee joint differently, suggesting unique changes to the set point of the knee. Interestingly, aging and menopause did not affect knee-joint laxity, suggesting that joint function was maintained, despite changes in gene expression. Taken together, these findings support the theory of the joint as an organ where the tissues of the joint adapt to maintain joint function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is some concern that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may impair the healing of certain musculoskeletal tissues. However, the effect of NSAIDs on the specialized fibrocartilaginous transition at the tendon-to-bone interface remains largely unknown. Thus, the purpose of the present study is to investigate the effect of NSAIDs on tendon-to-bone healing following acute injury or surgery., Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), and SportDiscus databases were searched from the time of database inception to May 14, 2018 to identify all clinical and basic science studies investigating the effect of NSAIDs on tendon-to-bone healing. Methodological quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) and SYstematic Review Center for Laboratory animal Research (SYRCLE) risk of bias assessment tools for clinical and basic science studies, respectively. A qualitative synthesis of the literature was performed with a subgroup meta-analysis of homogeneous basic science studies., Results: A total of 13 studies, including three clinical and 10 basic science studies, were included. The overall methodological quality of the included clinical studies was poor, while assessment of the basic science studies revealed consistent areas at high or unclear risk of bias. Of the included clinical studies, a single study reported a higher rate of rotator cuff repair failure with selective (COX-2) NSAID use compared with non-selective NSAID use, while no clinical failures were noted with NSAID use following distal biceps tendon repair. Basic science studies had heterogeneous outcome reporting. A subgroup analysis of homogeneous animal studies revealed no significant effect of all NSAIDs (Standard Mean Difference [SMD] -1.05, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] -2.39-0.30, p=0.13) or non-selective NSAIDs on load to failure (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -1.26-0.02, p=0.06)., Conclusions: The current literature does not provide sufficient evidence for or against the use of NSAIDs following acute injury or surgical repair of the tendon-bone interface. Level of Evidence: IV., Competing Interests: Disclosures: The authors report no potential conflicts of interest related to this study.