Interference Screw vs. Suture Anchor Fixation for Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis: Does it Matter?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Bioabsorbable interference screw fixation has superior biomechanical properties compared to suture anchor fixation for biceps tenodesis. However, it is unknown whether fixation technique influences clinical results.</p> <p>Hypothesis</p> <p>We hypothesize that subpectoral interference screw fixation offers relevant clinical advantages over suture anchor fixation for biceps tenodesis.</p> <p>Study Design</p> <p>Case Series.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a retrospective review of a consecutive series of 88 patients receiving open subpectoral biceps tenodesis with either interference screw fixation (34 patients) or suture anchor fixation (54 patients). Average follow up was 13 months. Outcomes included Visual Analogue Pain Scale (0–10), ASES score, modified Constant score, pain at the tenodesis site, failure of fixation, cosmesis, deformity (popeye) and complications.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no failures of fixation in this study. All patients showed significant improvement between their preoperative and postoperative status with regard to pain, ASES score, and abbreviated modified Constant scores. When comparing IF screw versus anchor outcomes, there was no statistical significance difference for VAS (p = 0.4), ASES score (p = 0.2), and modified Constant score (P = 0.09). One patient (3%) treated with IF screw complained of persistent bicipital groove tenderness, versus four patients (7%) in the SA group (nonsignificant).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Subpectoral biceps tenodesis reliably relieves pain and improves function. There was no statistically significant difference in the outcomes studied between the two fixation techniques. Residual pain at the site of tenodesis may be an issue when suture anchors are used in the subpectoral location.</p

Treatment of glenohumeral instability in rugby players

Rugby is a high-impact collision sport, with impact forces. Shoulder injuries are common and result in the longest time off sport for any joint injury in rugby. The most common injuries are to the glenohumeral joint with varying degrees of instability. The degree of instability can guide management. The three main types of instability presentations are: (1) frank dislocation, (2) subluxations and (3) subclinical instability with pain and clicking. Understanding the exact mechanism of injury can guide diagnosis with classical patterns of structural injuries. The standard clinical examination in a large, muscular athlete may be normal, so specific tests and techniques are needed to unearth signs of pathology. Taking these factors into consideration, along with the imaging, allows a treatment strategy. However, patient and sport factors need to be also considered, particularly the time of the season and stage of sporting career. Surgery to repair the structural damage should include all lesions found. In chronic, recurrent dislocations with major structural lesions, reconstruction procedures such as the Latarjet procedure yields better outcomes. Rehabilitation should be safe, goal-driven and athlete- specific. Return to sport is dependent on a number of factors, driven by the healing process, sport requirements and extrinsic pressures

Acromioclavicular joint dislocation: a comparative biomechanical study of the palmaris-longus tendon graft reconstruction with other augmentative methods in cadaveric models

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Acromioclavicular injuries are common in sports medicine. Surgical intervention is generally advocated for chronic instability of Rockwood grade III and more severe injuries. Various methods of coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction and augmentation have been described. The objective of this study is to compare the biomechanical properties of a novel palmaris-longus tendon reconstruction with those of the native AC+CC ligaments, the modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction, the ACJ capsuloligamentous complex repair, screw and clavicle hook plate augmentation.</p> <p>Hypothesis</p> <p>There is no difference, biomechanically, amongst the various reconstruction and augmentative methods.</p> <p>Study Design</p> <p>Controlled laboratory cadaveric study.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>54 cadaveric native (acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular) ligaments were tested using the Instron machine. Superior loading was performed in the 6 groups: 1) in the intact states, 2) after modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction (WD), 3) after modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction with acromioclavicular joint capsuloligamentous repair (WD.ACJ), 4) after modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction with clavicular hook plate augmentation (WD.CP) or 5) after modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction with coracoclavicular screw augmentation (WD.BS) and 6) after modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction with mersilene tape-palmaris-longus tendon graft reconstruction (WD. PLmt). Posterior-anterior (horizontal) loading was similarly performed in all groups, except groups 4 and 5. The respective failure loads, stiffnesses, displacements at failure and modes of failure were recorded. Data analysis was carried out using a one-way ANOVA, with Student's unpaired t-test for unpaired data (S-PLUS statistical package 2005).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Native ligaments were the strongest and stiffest when compared to other modes of reconstruction and augmentation except coracoclavicular screw, in both posterior-anterior and superior directions (p < 0.005).</p> <p>WD.ACJ provided additional posterior-anterior (P = 0. 039) but not superior (p = 0.250) stability when compared to WD alone.</p> <p>WD+PLmt, in loads and stiffness at failure superiorly, was similar to WD+CP (p = 0.066). WD+PLmt, in loads and stiffness at failure postero-anteriorly, was similar to WD+ACJ (p = 0.084).</p> <p>Superiorly, WD+CP had similar strength as WD+BS (p = 0.057), but it was less stiff (p < 0.005).</p> <p>Conclusions and Clinical Relevance</p> <p>Modified Weaver-Dunn procedure must always be supplemented with acromioclavicular capsuloligamentous repair to increase posterior-anterior stability. Palmaris-Longus tendon graft provides both additional superior and posterior-anterior stability when used for acromioclavicular capsuloligamentous reconstruction. It is a good alternative to clavicle hook plate in acromioclavicular dislocation.</p

Losartan Slows Pancreatic Tumor Progression and Extends Survival of SPARC-Null Mice by Abrogating Aberrant TGFβ Activation

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, a desmoplastic disease, is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the Western world due, in large part, to locally invasive primary tumor growth and ensuing metastasis. SPARC is a matricellular protein that governs extracellular matrix (ECM) deposition and maturation during tissue remodeling, particularly, during wound healing and tumorigenesis. In the present study, we sought to determine the mechanism by which lack of host SPARC alters the tumor microenvironment and enhances invasion and metastasis of an orthotopic model of pancreatic cancer. We identified that levels of active TGFβ1 were increased significantly in tumors grown in SPARC-null mice. TGFβ1 contributes to many aspects of tumor development including metastasis, endothelial cell permeability, inflammation and fibrosis, all of which are altered in the absence of stromal-derived SPARC. Given these results, we performed a survival study to assess the contribution of increased TGFβ1 activity to tumor progression in SPARC-null mice using losartan, an angiotensin II type 1 receptor antagonist that diminishes TGFβ1 expression and activation in vivo. Tumors grown in SPARC-null mice progressed more quickly than those grown in wild-type littermates leading to a significant reduction in median survival. However, median survival of SPARC-null animals treated with losartan was extended to that of losartan-treated wild-type controls. In addition, losartan abrogated TGFβ induced gene expression, reduced local invasion and metastasis, decreased vascular permeability and altered the immune profile of tumors grown in SPARC-null mice. These data support the concept that aberrant TGFβ1-activation in the absence of host SPARC contributes significantly to tumor progression and suggests that SPARC, by controlling ECM deposition and maturation, can regulate TGFβ availability and activation