1.Biomechanical Comparison of the Latarjet Procedure with and without Capsular Repair.
Matthew T KLEINER ; William B PAYNE ; Michelle H MCGARRY ; James E TIBONE ; Thay Q LEE
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery 2016;8(1):84-91
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine if capsular repair used in conjunction with the Latarjet procedure results in significant alterations in glenohumeral rotational range of motion and translation. METHODS: Glenohumeral rotational range of motion and translation were measured in eight cadaveric shoulders in 90degrees of abduction in both the scapular and coronal planes under the following four conditions: intact glenoid, 20% bony Bankart lesion, modified Latarjet without capsular repair, and modified Latarjet with capsular repair. RESULTS: Creation of a 20% bony Bankart lesion led to significant increases in anterior and inferior glenohumeral translation and rotational range of motion (p < 0.005). The Latarjet procedure restored anterior and inferior stability compared to the bony Bankart condition. It also led to significant increases in glenohumeral internal and external rotational range of motion relative to both the intact and bony Bankart conditions (p < 0.05). The capsular repair from the coracoacromial ligament stump to the native capsule did not significantly affect translations relative to the Latarjet condition; however it did cause a significant decrease in external rotation in both the scapular and coronal planes (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The Latarjet procedure is effective in restoring anteroinferior glenohumeral stability. The addition of a capsular repair does not result in significant added stability; however, it does appear to have the effect of restricting glenohumeral external rotational range of motion relative to the Latarjet procedure performed without capsular repair.
Biomechanical Phenomena/*physiology
;
Female
;
Humans
;
Humerus/physiology/surgery
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Range of Motion, Articular/*physiology
;
Scapula/physiology/surgery
;
Shoulder Joint/*physiology/*surgery
2.Evaluating the Revised American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Guidelines for Common Bile Duct Stone Diagnosis
Jake S. JACOB ; Michelle E. LEE ; Erin Y. CHEW ; Aaron P. THRIFT ; Robert J. SEALOCK
Clinical Endoscopy 2021;54(2):269-274
Background/Aims:
The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) revised its guidelines for risk stratification of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the revision and to compare it to the previous guidelines.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 267 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. We identified high-risk patients according to the original and revised guidelines and examined the diagnostic accuracy of both guidelines. We measured the association between individual criteria and choledocholithiasis.
Results:
Under the original guidelines, 165 (62%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 79% had confirmed choledocholithiasis. The categorization had a sensitivity and specificity of 68% and 55%, respectively, for the detection of choledocholithiasis. Under the revised guidelines, 86 (32%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 83% had choledocholithiasis. The revised categorization had a lower sensitivity and higher specificity of 37% and 80%, respectively. The positive predictive value of the high-risk categorization increased with the revision, reflecting a potential decrease in diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatograpies (ERCPs). Stone visualized on imaging had the greatest specificity for choledocholithiasis. Gallstone pancreatitis was not associated with the risk for choledocholithiasis.
Conclusions
The 2019 revision of the ASGE guidelines decreases the utilization of ERCP as a diagnostic modality and offers an improved risk stratification tool.
3.Evaluating the Revised American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Guidelines for Common Bile Duct Stone Diagnosis
Jake S. JACOB ; Michelle E. LEE ; Erin Y. CHEW ; Aaron P. THRIFT ; Robert J. SEALOCK
Clinical Endoscopy 2021;54(2):269-274
Background/Aims:
The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) revised its guidelines for risk stratification of patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the revision and to compare it to the previous guidelines.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 267 patients with suspected choledocholithiasis. We identified high-risk patients according to the original and revised guidelines and examined the diagnostic accuracy of both guidelines. We measured the association between individual criteria and choledocholithiasis.
Results:
Under the original guidelines, 165 (62%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 79% had confirmed choledocholithiasis. The categorization had a sensitivity and specificity of 68% and 55%, respectively, for the detection of choledocholithiasis. Under the revised guidelines, 86 (32%) patients met the criteria for high risk, of whom 83% had choledocholithiasis. The revised categorization had a lower sensitivity and higher specificity of 37% and 80%, respectively. The positive predictive value of the high-risk categorization increased with the revision, reflecting a potential decrease in diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatograpies (ERCPs). Stone visualized on imaging had the greatest specificity for choledocholithiasis. Gallstone pancreatitis was not associated with the risk for choledocholithiasis.
Conclusions
The 2019 revision of the ASGE guidelines decreases the utilization of ERCP as a diagnostic modality and offers an improved risk stratification tool.
4.Biomechanical investigation of arm position on deforming muscular forces in proximal humerus fractures
Christen E. CHALMERS ; David J. WRIGHT ; Nilay A. PATEL ; Hunter HITCHENS ; Michelle MCGARRY ; Thay Q. LEE ; John A. SCOLARO
Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow 2022;25(4):282-287
Background:
Muscular forces drive proximal humeral fracture deformity, yet it is unknown if arm position can help mitigate such forces. Our hypothesis was that glenohumeral abduction and humeral internal rotation decrease the pull of the supraspinatus and subscapularis muscles, minimizing varus fracture deformity.
Methods:
A medial wedge osteotomy was performed in eight cadaveric shoulders to simulate a two-part fracture. The specimens were tested on a custom shoulder testing system. Humeral head varus was measured following physiologic muscle loading at neutral and 20° humeral internal rotation at both 0° and 20° glenohumeral abduction.
Results:
There was a significant decrease in varus deformity caused by the subscapularis (p<0.05) at 20° abduction. Significantly increasing humeral internal rotation decreased varus deformity caused by the subscapularis (p<0.05) at both abduction angles and that caused by the supraspinatus (p<0.05) and infraspinatus (p<0.05) at 0° abduction only.
Conclusions
Postoperative shoulder abduction and internal rotation can be protective against varus failure following proximal humeral fracture fixation as these positions decrease tension on the supraspinatus and subscapularis muscles. Use of a resting sling that places the shoulder in this position should be considered.