Changes in patient-reported pain interference after surgical treatment of painful lower extremity neuromas

PURPOSE: Painful neuromas commonly cause neuropathic pain, in up to 1 in 20 cases of traumatic or iatrogenic nerve injury. Despite the multiple surgical treatment types that reduce pain, no type has been universally accepted. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study by administering follow-up surveys to all surgical patients treated in our department for lower-extremity neuroma from September 1, 2015, to October 22, 2021, that could be contacted, excluding those with Morton neuroma. In addition to the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference (PI) questionnaire, survey questions covered the time to pain reduction, use of physical or occupational therapy, and characteristics of the pain. When available, previously collected preoperative and postoperative PROMIS PI data were used for patients who could not be contacted for the telephone survey. Paired-sample nonparametric testing was used to compare preoperative and postoperative PROMIS PI scores. RESULTS: Initial query in the medical record by Current Procedural Terminology codes yielded 1,812 patients for chart review, of whom 33 were eligible to call. In total, 9 (27%) patients completed both preoperative and postoperative PROMIS PIs: 6 (18.2%) completed full telephone surveys and 3 (9.1%) had preoperative and postoperative PROMIS PI data in the chart review but could not be contacted for the full telephone survey. Four of the 6 telephone-survey respondents reported pain reduction within 12 months of their surgery. Wilcoxon signed-rank testing demonstrated a moderate but nonstatistically significant reduction in PROMIS PI scores, with a median difference of -4.85 ( CONCLUSIONS: There were notable improvements in our cohort, but larger studies are needed to determine whether surgical treatment of lower-extremity neuroma results in a clinically important and significant difference in PROMIS PI scores, as well as to discern the advantages each treatment. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV

Future considerations in the diagnosis and treatment of compressive neuropathies of the upper extremity

Compressive neuropathies of the upper extremity are among the most common conditions seen by hand surgeons. The diagnoses of carpal tunnel syndrome and cubital tunnel syndrome have traditionally been made by a combination of history, physical examination, and electrodiagnostic testing. However, findings can be nonspecific and electrodiagnostic testing is invasive for the patient. The diagnosis of compressive neuropathies continues to evolve as technology advances, and newer diagnostic modalities predominantly focus on preoperative diagnostic imaging with ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging/neurography. With the advent of cheaper, faster, and less invasive imaging, the future may bring a paradigm shift away from electrophysiology as the gold standard for the preoperative diagnosis of compressive neuropathies. Intraoperative imaging of nerve health is an emerging concept that warrants further investigation, whereas postoperative imaging of nerve recovery with ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging currently has a limited role because of nonspecific findings and potential for misinterpretation. Advances in surgical treatment of compressive neuropathies appear to center around the use of imaging for less invasive neurolysis techniques and other adjunctive treatments with nerve decompression. The management of failed peripheral nerve decompressions and recurrent compressive neuropathies remains challenging

Safety of overlapping inpatient orthopaedic surgery: A multicenter study

BackgroundAlthough overlapping surgery is used to maximize efficiency, more empirical data are needed to guide patient safety. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate the safety of overlapping inpatient orthopaedic surgery, as judged by the occurrence of perioperative complications.MethodsAll inpatient orthopaedic surgical procedures performed at 5 academic institutions from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2015, were included. Overlapping surgery was defined as 2 skin incisions open simultaneously for 1 surgeon. In comparing patients who underwent overlapping surgery with those who underwent non-overlapping surgery, the primary outcome was the occurrence of a perioperative complication within 30 days of the surgical procedure, and secondary outcomes included all-cause 30-day readmission, length of stay, and mortality. To determine if there was an association between overlapping surgery and a perioperative complication, we tested for non-inferiority of overlapping surgery, assuming a null hypothesis of an increased risk of 50%. We used an inverse probability of treatment weighted regression model adjusted for institution, procedure type, demographic characteristics (age, sex, race, comorbidities), admission type, admission severity of illness, and clustering by surgeon.ResultsAmong 14,135 cases, the frequency of overlapping surgery was 40%. The frequencies of perioperative complications were 1% in the overlapping surgery group and 2% in the non-overlapping surgery group. The overlapping surgery group was non-inferior to the non-overlapping surgery group (odds ratio [OR], 0.61 [90% confidence interval (CI), 0.45 to 0.83]; p < 0.001), with reduced odds of perioperative complications (OR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.43 to 0.88]; p = 0.009). For secondary outcomes, there was a significantly lower chance of all-cause 30-day readmission in the overlapping surgery group (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.52 to 0.87]; p = 0.003) and shorter length of stay (e, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.89 to 0.99]; p = 0.012). There was no difference in mortality.ConclusionsOur results suggest that overlapping inpatient orthopaedic surgery does not introduce additional perioperative risk for the complications that we evaluated. The suitability of this practice should be determined by individual surgeons on a case-by-case basis with appropriate informed consent.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

Early expression of MMP-9 predicts recovery of tibialis anterior after sciatic nerve crush injury

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the expression of molecular markers and epineural blood flow after differing degrees of nerve injury to identify potential tools to predict nerve recovery in a rat sciatic nerve model. Methods: A total of 72 rats were divided into nine groups. Each group was subjected to one of three crush injuries, created by applying one of three vascular clamps for 30 seconds. Vascularity was assessed with laser Doppler flowmetry before and after crush, and at nonsurvival surgery. Nonsurvival surgeries were performed 6 hours, 2 weeks, or 6 weeks later with nerve conduction studies and muscle strength testing. Expression of matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP-9) and matrix metalloproteinase 2 (MMP-2) in each nerve was quantified using with enzyme linked immunosorbent analysis. Results: Persistent hyperemia was noted in the zone of injury compared with baseline at 2 weeks and 6 weeks in the groups that displayed incomplete recovery. Expression of MMP-9 at 6 hours increased with increasing severity of crush and was inversely related to tibialis anterior muscle force recovery. The ratio of MMP-9:MMP-2 expression correlated well with recovery of compound nerve action potential amplitude at 6 weeks. Conclusions: Resolution of nerve hyperemia may correlate with nerve recovery from trauma, but early measures of nerve blood flow after injury are not prognostic of recovery. Ratio of MMP-9:MMP-2 expression 6 hours after injury correlates with recovery of compound nerve action potential at 6 weeks, while MMP-9 expression alone predicts tibialis anterior recovery. These findings together suggest that increased MMP-9 expression is a potentially useful marker of more severe nerve injury

Disparities in access to musculoskeletal care: Narrowing the gap: AOA critical issues symposium

The current health-care system in the United States has numerous barriers to quality, accessible, and affordable musculoskeletal care for multiple subgroups of our population. These hurdles include complex cultural, educational, and socioeconomic factors. Tertiary referral centers provide a disproportionately large amount of the care for the uninsured and underinsured members of our society. These gaps in access to care for certain subgroups lead to inappropriate emergency room usage, lengthy hospitalizations, increased administrative load, lost productivity, and avoidable complications and/or deaths, which all represent a needless burden on our health-care system. Through advocacy, policy changes, workforce diversification, and practice changes, orthopaedic surgeons have a responsibility to seek solutions to improve access to quality and affordable musculoskeletal care for the communities that they serve