No abstract

Background:The prevalence of rotator cuff repair continues to rise, with a noted transition from open to arthroscopic techniques in recent years. One reported advantage of arthroscopic repair is a lower infection rate. However, to date, the infection rates of these 2 techniques have not been directly compared with large samples at a single institution with fully integrated medical records.Purpose:To retrospectively compare postoperative infection rates between arthroscopic and open rotator cuff repair.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:From January 2003 until May 2011, a total of 1556 patients underwent rotator cuff repair at a single institution. These patients were divided into an arthroscopic repair group and an open group. A Pearson chi-square test and Fisher exact test were used, with a subgroup analysis to segment the open repair group into mini-open and open procedures. The odds ratio and 95% CI of developing a postoperative infection was calculated for the 2 groups. A multiple-regressions model was then utilized to identify predictors of the presence of infection. Infection was defined as only those treated with surgical intervention, thus excluding superficial infections treated with antibiotics alone.Results:A total of 903 patients had an arthroscopic repair, while 653 had open repairs (600 mini-open, 53 open). There were 4 confirmed infections in the arthroscopic group and 16 in the open group (15 mini-open, 1 open), resulting in postoperative infection rates of 0.44% and 2.45%, respectively. Subgroup analysis of the mini-open and open groups demonstrated a postoperative infection rate of 2.50% and 1.89%, respectively. The open group had an odds ratio of 5.645 (95% CI, 1.9-17.0) to develop a postoperative infection compared with the arthroscopic group.Conclusion:Patients undergoing open rotator cuff repair had a significantly higher rate of postoperative infection compared with those undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Background:Lacrosse and ice hockey are quickly growing in popularity, while football remains the most popular sport among high school student-athletes. Injuries remain a concern, given the physical nature of these contact sports.Purpose:To describe the rates and patterns of injuries sustained as a result of intentional player contact in United States high school boys’ football, ice hockey, and lacrosse.Study Design:Descriptive epidemiology study.Methods:We conducted a secondary analysis of High School RIO (Reporting Information Online) data, including exposure and injury data collected from a large sample of high schools in the United States from 2005-2006 through 2015-2016. Data were analyzed to calculate rates, assess patterns, and evaluate potential risk factors for player-to-player contact injuries.Results:A total of 34,532 injuries in boys’ football, ice hockey, and lacrosse occurred during 9,078,902 athlete-exposures (AEs), for a rate of 3.80 injuries per 1000 AEs in the 3 contact sports of interest. The risk of injuries was found to be greater in competition compared with practice for all 3 sports, with the largest difference in ice hockey (rate ratio, 8.28) and the smallest difference in lacrosse (rate ratio, 3.72). In all 3 contact sports, the most commonly injured body site in competition and practice caused by both tackling/checking and being tackled/checked was the head/face. However, a significantly greater proportion of concussions sustained in football were the result of tackling compared with being tackled (28.2% vs 24.1%, respectively). In addition, a significantly greater proportion of concussions were sustained in competition compared with practice for all 3 sports.Conclusion:This study is the first to collectively compare injury rates and injury patterns sustained from intentional player-to-player contact in boys’ high school football, ice hockey, and lacrosse. Notably, there was a relatively high risk of injuries and concussions during football practices.

Background:As participation in high school athletics increases, so does the number of adolescents experiencing sports-related injury. Understanding injury patterns is an important component to developing and evaluating prevention and rehabilitation programs.Purpose:To analyze recurrent injury rates and patterns among high school athletes, to compare recurrent injuries with new injuries, and to evaluate injury trends over time.Study Design:Descriptive epidemiology study.Methods:High school sports injury data on 24 sports were collected from 2005-2006 through 2015-2016 via the High School RIO (Reporting Information Online) surveillance system. Injury rates were calculated as number of injuries per 10,000 athletic exposures (AEs). Injury rate ratios and injury proportion ratios (IPRs) were calculated to compare differences among subgroups.Results:Overall, 78,005 injuries were sustained during 40,195,806 AEs, for an injury rate of 19.41 per 10,000 AEs. Of these, 69,821 (89.5%) were new injuries, and 8184 (10.5%) were recurrent. The ankle was the most commonly injured body part among recurrent injuries, while the head/face was the most common body part that sustained new injuries. Ligament sprains were more often recurrent, while concussions were more commonly diagnosed as new, although concussions represented 16.7% of recurrent injuries. Trends for recurrent injuries over time were relatively stable. The proportion of athletes who had >3 weeks of time loss or medical disqualification (15.8% vs 13.3%; IPR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.13-1.26) or who voluntarily withdrew from sport (2.5% vs 1.1%; IPR, 2.33; 95% CI, 2.00-2.73) was significantly greater for recurrent injuries than new injuries. Furthermore, a greater proportion of recurrent injuries resulted in surgery (8.1% vs 6.0%; IPR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.24-1.46).Conclusion:Although only 10.5% of all injuries were recurrent, they more frequently resulted in missing >3 weeks of playing time and were more often managed surgically when compared with new injuries. The rate of recurrent injuries has not increased over the past decade.

No abstract

No abstract

Therapeutic, Level IV: Case study.

Superior labral anterior and posterior lesions and long head biceps injury are 2 common sources of shoulder pain. The presenting complaints and physical examination findings for these etiologies are often nonspecific, making diagnosis challenging. Further complicating their diagnoses, these 2 pathologies often cooccur together or with other shoulder pathologies such as subacromial bursitis, rotator cuff tear, and shoulder instability. However, with advancement in magnetic resonance imaging and shoulder arthroscopy techniques the ability to diagnose and treat these pathologies has vastly improved over the past 30 years. This review provides a case-based description of the correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopic findings in common superior labral anterior and posterior and long head biceps injury, accompanied with current management strategies.