Search

Pathology of the long head of the biceps tendon is commonly associated with massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs), which account for roughly one third of all rotator cuff tears. Treatment options for this condition include tenotomy, tenodesis, augmentation, and the use of the tendon as a graft for partial superior capsule reconstruction. Augmentation and superior capsular reconstruction are evolving techniques in the management of MRCTs. However, similar to the lack of consensus on the treatment of MRCTs, there are no clear guidelines for the management of concurrent biceps tendon pathology.

Background: Surgeon visual estimation of shoulder range of motion (ROM) is commonplace in the outpatient office setting and routinely reported in clinical research, but the reliability and accuracy of this practice remain unclear. The purpose of this study is to establish the reliability and accuracy of remote visual estimation of shoulder ROM in healthy volunteers and symptomatic patients among a large group of shoulder surgeons. Our hypothesis is that remote visual estimation would be reliable and accurate compared with the digital goniometer method. Methods: Fifty shoulder surgeon members of the PacWest Shoulder and Elbow Society independently determined the active shoulder forward flexion (FF), internal rotation at 90° abduction (IR90), external rotation at 90° abduction, external rotation at the side , and maximal spinal level reached with internal rotation (IRspine) through visual estimation of video recordings taken from 10 healthy volunteers and 10 symptomatic patients. Variations in measurements were quantified using the interobserver reliability through calculation of the intraclass correlation coefficient. Accuracy was determined through comparison with digital goniometer measurements obtained with an on-screen protractor application using Bland–Altman mean differences and 95% limits of agreement. Results: The interobserver reliability among examiners showed moderate to excellent correlation, with intraclass correlation coefficient ranging from 0.768 to 0.928 for the healthy volunteers and 0.739 to 0.878 for the symptomatic patients. Accuracy was limited, with upper limits of agreement exceeding the established minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for FF (20° vs. MCID of 14°) and IR90 (25° vs. 18°) in the healthy volunteers and for FF (33° vs. 16°), external rotation at 90° abduction (21° vs. 18°), and IR90 (31° vs. 20°) in the symptomatic patients. Conclusion: Despite generally high intersurgeon reliability in the visual estimation of shoulder ROM, there was questionable accuracy when compared to digital goniometer measurements,with measurement errors often exceeding established MCID values. Given the potential implications for the clinical response to treatment and the significance of research findings, the adoption of validated instruments to measure ROM and the standardization of examination procedures should be considered.

Background: Different patient-reported outcome (PRO) tools are used in patients with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) which complicates outcome comparisons. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare PRO usage and baseline scores across world regions and countries in patients with ARCR of massive rotator cuff tears (MRCT). Methods: A systematic review was performed on ARCR for MRCT. The search was conducted from September to November of 2022 using the MEDLINE database for articles published in the last 15 years. Thirty-seven articles were included after initial screening and full-text review. In each article, PRO usage, baseline scores, and country of origin were collected. PRO usage was reported in percentages and baseline scores were normalized for each region to facilitate comparisons. Normalization was performed using the PRO means from each article. These averages were converted to fractions using the worst and best possible scores. These were combined into a single numerical value, expressed as a decimal from 0 to 1, using the total sample size for each tool per region. Values closer to 0 represent worse functional outcomes. Results: Thirty-two percent (n = 12) of articles were from Asia, 43.2% (n = 16) from Europe, 5.4% (n = 2) from the Middle East, and 18.9% (n = 7) from North America. The most commonly reported PRO tools were American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) in 19 papers, Constant–Murley Score (CMS) in 26 papers, Visual Analog Scale for pain (VAS) in 19 papers, and University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA) in 11 papers. ASES was reported in 51% of articles with 63% being from Asia (n = 12) compared to 21% from North America (n = 4). CMS was reported in 70% of studies with 58% being from Europe. Upon normalization, the preoperative score ranged from 0.30 to 0.44. Europe (0.39), and North America (0.40) showed similar scores. The lowest and highest scores were seen in the Middle East (0.3) and Asia (0.44) respectively. Conclusion: There is no standardized method to report outcomes in patients undergoing ARCR for MRCT. Great variation in usage exists in PROs which complicates data comparison between world regions. With normalization, baseline scores where similar among Asia, North America, and Europe, and lowest in the Middle East.

Purpose: To investigate the performance of the bear hug (BH) and belly press (BP) tests in diagnosing tears of the subscapularis (SSC). Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on prospectively maintained data on patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) of SSC tears between 2011 and 2021. A control group also was obtained of ARCRs with an intact SSC tendon. All examinations and ARCRs were performed by one high-volume shoulder surgeon. The BH test and BP test results were compared with arthroscopic findings as the gold-standard diagnostic modality. Tear type was classified based on the Lafosse classification. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, false-positive and false-negative rates, and accuracy were calculated for both tests. Results: A total of 1,122 patients were included for analysis, 866 with intraoperatively confirmed SSC tears (77%) and 256 without (23%). The BH test diagnosed SSC tears with a sensitivity of 46.1% and a specificity of 83.2%, whereas the BP test diagnosed tears with a sensitivity of 23.3% and a specificity of 93.4%. Overall, both tests missed SSC tears in 42.3% (n = 475) of cases. The BH test had accuracy rates of 25.9% for SSC type I tear, 48.7% for type II tear, 65% for type III tear, and 81.7% for type IV-V tear. In contrast, the BP test had accuracy rates of 7.6% for type I tear, 14.7% for type II tear, 42% for type III tear, and 68.7% for type IV-V tear. Conclusions: The BH test had greater sensitivity than the BP test in identifying SSC tears. Both tests showed low accuracy in identifying SSC tears as tear size decreased. Combining both tests did not provide any additional benefits over using the BH test alone. Level of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study.

Purpose: To compare radiologist and surgeon magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) interpretations of subscapularis (SSC) tears against intraoperative arthroscopic examination. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively maintained data on patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with and without SSC tears between 2011 and 2022. The radiologists’ assessments of SSC integrity were extracted from the MRI reports. One high-volume fellowship-trained shoulder surgeon assessed all MRI scans for the presence or absence of SSC tears. Radiologist and surgeon MRI-based assessments were compared against the diagnostic gold standard (intraoperative arthroscopic examination) and classified according to the Lafosse classification. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were calculated. Results: A total of 1,090 patients were included for analysis, 839 with intraoperatively confirmed SSC tears (77%) and 251 without such tears (23%). Radiologists diagnosed SSC tears with a sensitivity of 56.0% (470 of 839 patients) and specificity of 67.3% (169 of 251 patients) via MRI, whereas the surgeon diagnosed SSC tears with a sensitivity of 71.4% (599 of 839 patients) and specificity of 78.1% (196 of 251 patients). Overall, radiologists only correctly identified 56% of SSC tears whereas the shoulder surgeon correctly identified approximately 71.4% of tears. When considering arthroscopically confirmed tear size, that is, intact, partial, full thickness [upper border], and complete, the radiologists’ diagnosis rates with MRI were 67.3%, 40.4%, 64.6%, and 78.3%, respectively, and the surgeon’s diagnosis rates were 78.1%, 52.7%, 81.9%, and 97.5%, respectively. Conclusions: In a community practice, radiologists miss approximately 50% of SSC tears on MRI examination. A shoulder surgeon with the benefit of clinical examination misses 28.6% of tears on MRI. Accuracy increases as tear size increases, with radiologists detecting 40.4% of partial tears and 78.3% of complete tears and a surgeon detecting 52.7% and 97.5%, respectively. Level of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study (nonconsecutive patients).

Purpose: To report patient-reported outcomes (PROs), range of motion (ROM), and satisfaction, in patients who underwent arthroscopic lysis of adhesions for stiffness after open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for fracture. Methods: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients with stiffness who underwent arthroscopic lysis of adhesions following ORIF or RSA for proximal humerus fracture at a single institution between 2012 and 2021 with minimum 1-year follow-up. PROs including visual analog scale for pain (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), as well as active ROM including forward flexion (FF), external rotation (ER), internal rotation (IR), were collected pre- and postoperatively. Attempted nonoperative treatment before arthroscopic lysis of adhesions was documented. Complications and satisfaction were also recorded. Results: A total of 21 patients met the study criteria (4 RSA, 17 ORIF), with an average age of 66.7 ± 8 years. The study sample comprised mostly of female patients (90%). The mean time from the index surgery to arthroscopy was 9 months, and mean follow-up post-lysis was 17 months. Patients with ORIF reported significant pain relief (VAS, Δ –3.2) and improvement in range of motion (FF, Δ 36°; ER, Δ 20°; IR Δ 3 spinal levels) and PROs (ASES, Δ 34.7; SSV Δ 44.8) (P

Arthroscopic repair of massive rotator cuff tears can be technically challenging but is achievable in many cases. Performing adequate releases are important for successful tendon mobility and avoiding excessive tension in the final repair, thus restoring the native anatomy and biomechanics. This Technical Note provides a step-by-step approach to release and mobilize massive rotator cuff tears to or near anatomical tendon footprints.