Orthopaedic surgeons prescribe more opioids than any other surgical speciality. Opioids remain the analgesic of choice following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery. There is growing evidence that opioid-sparing protocols may reduce postoperative opioid consumption while adequately addressing patients’ pain. However, there are a lack of prospective, comparative trials evaluating their effectiveness. The objective of the current randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the efficacy of a multi-modal, opioid-sparing approach to postoperative pain management in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder and knee surgery. The NO PAin trial is a pragmatic, definitive RCT (NCT04566250) enrolling 200 adult patients undergoing outpatient shoulder or knee arthroscopy. Patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to an opioid-sparing group or standard of care. The opioid-sparing group receives a three-pronged prescription package consisting of 1) a non-opioid prescription: naproxen, acetaminophen and pantoprazole, 2) a limited opioid “rescue prescription” of hydromorphone, and 3) a patient education infographic. The control group is the current standard of care as per the treating surgeon, which consists of an opioid analgesic. The primary outcome of interest is oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption up to 6 weeks postoperatively. The secondary outcomes are postoperative pain scores, patient satisfaction, quantity of OMEs prescribed and number of opioid refills. Patients are followed at both 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Data analysts and outcome assessors are blinded to the treatment groups. As of December 1, 2021 we have enrolled 166 patients, reaching 83% of target enrolment. Based on the current recruitment rate, we anticipate that enrolment will be completed by the end of January 2022 with final follow-up and study close out completed by March of 2022. The final results will be released at the Canadian Orthopaedic Association Meeting in June 2022 and be presented as follows. The mean difference in OME consumption was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in OMEs prescribed was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in Visual Analogue Pain Scores (VAS) and patient satisfaction are XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The absolute difference in opioid refills was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The results of the current study will demonstrate whether an opioid sparing approach to postoperative outpatient pain management is effective at reducing opioid consumption while adequately addressing postoperative pain in patients undergoing outpatient shoulder and knee arthroscopy. This study is novel in the field of arthroscopic surgery, and its results will help to guide appropriate postoperative analgesic management following these widely performed procedures.
Over half of postpartum women experience pelvic ring or hip pain, with multiple anatomic locations involved. The sacroiliac joints, pubic symphysis, lumbar spine and pelvic girdle are all well documented pain generators. However, despite the prevalence of postpartum hip pain, there is a paucity of literature regarding underlying soft tissue intra-articular etiologies. The purpose of this systematic review is to document and assess the available evidence regarding underlying intra-articular soft tissue etiologies of peri- and postpartum hip pain. Three online databases (Embase, PubMed and Ovid [MEDLINE]) were searched from database inception until April 11, 2021. The inclusion criteria were English language studies, human studies, and those regarding symptomatic labral pathology in the peri- or postpartum period. Exclusion criteria were animal studies, commentaries, book chapters, review articles and technical studies. All titles, relevant abstracts and full-text articles were screened by two reviewers independently. Descriptive characteristics including the study design, sample size, sex ratio, mean age, clinical and radiographic findings, pathology, subsequent management and outcomes were documented. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) instrument. The initial search identified 2472 studies. A systemic screening and assessment of eligibility identified 5 articles that satisfied the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two females were included. Twenty patients presented with labral pathology that necessitated hip arthroscopy with labral debridement or repair with or without acetabuloplasty and/or femoroplasty. One patient presented with an incidental labral tear in the context of osteitis condensans illi. One patient presented with post-traumatic osteoarthritis necessitating a hip replacement. The mean MINORS score of these 5 non-comparative studies was 2.8 (range 0-7) demonstrating a very low quality of evidence. The contribution of intra-articular soft tissue injury is a documented, albeit sparse, etiology contributing to peri- and postpartum hip pain. Further research to better delineate the prevalence, mechanism of injury, natural history and management options for women suffering from these pathologies at an already challenging time is necessary to advance the care of these patients.
Orthopaedic surgeons prescribe more opioids than any other surgical speciality. Opioids remain the analgesic of choice following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery. There is growing evidence that opioid-sparing protocols may reduce postoperative opioid consumption while adequately addressing patients’ pain. However, there are a lack of prospective, comparative trials evaluating their effectiveness. The objective of the current randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the efficacy of a multi-modal, opioid-sparing approach to postoperative pain management in patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder and knee surgery. The NO PAin trial is a pragmatic, definitive RCT (NCT04566250) enrolling 200 adult patients undergoing outpatient shoulder or knee arthroscopy. Patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to an opioid-sparing group or standard of care. The opioid-sparing group receives a three-pronged prescription package consisting of 1) a non-opioid prescription: naproxen, acetaminophen and pantoprazole, 2) a limited opioid “rescue prescription” of hydromorphone, and 3) a patient education infographic. The control group is the current standard of care as per the treating surgeon, which consists of an opioid analgesic. The primary outcome of interest is oral morphine equivalent (OME) consumption up to 6 weeks postoperatively. The secondary outcomes are postoperative pain scores, patient satisfaction, quantity of OMEs prescribed and number of opioid refills. Patients are followed at both 2 and 6 weeks postoperatively. Data analysts and outcome assessors are blinded to the treatment groups. As of December 1, 2021 we have enrolled 166 patients, reaching 83% of target enrolment. Based on the current recruitment rate, we anticipate that enrolment will be completed by the end of January 2022 with final follow-up and study close out completed by March of 2022. The final results will be released at the Canadian Orthopaedic Association Meeting in June 2022 and be presented as follows. The mean difference in OME consumption was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in OMEs prescribed was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean difference in Visual Analogue Pain Scores (VAS) and patient satisfaction are XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The absolute difference in opioid refills was XX (95%CI: YY-YY, p=X). The results of the current study will demonstrate whether an opioid sparing approach to postoperative outpatient pain management is effective at reducing opioid consumption while adequately addressing postoperative pain in patients undergoing outpatient shoulder and knee arthroscopy. This study is novel in the field of arthroscopic surgery, and its results will help to guide appropriate postoperative analgesic management following these widely performed procedures.
Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a condition of the hip where there is a mismatch of the femoral head and hip acetabulum. This mismatch creates abnormal contact between the bones and causes hip pain which can lead to damage, and eventually osteoarthritis of the hip. The diagnosis and treatment of FAI has become one of the most popular clinical scenarios in orthopaedic surgery, with hip arthroscopy procedures increasing exponentially over the past five years. Surgical intervention usually involves correcting the existing deformities by reshaping the ball and socket (“osteoplasty” or “rim trimming”) so that they fit together more easily while repairing any other existing soft tissue damage in the hip joint (e.g. labral repair). Although correction of the misshaped bony anatomy and associated intra-articular soft tissue damage of the hip is thought to appease impingement and improve pain and function, the current evidence is based on small, observational, and low quality studies. A lack of definitive evidence regarding the efficacy of osteochondroplasty in treating FAI fueled the design and execution of the FIRST randomized controlled trial (RCT). FIRST evaluated the impact of surgical correction of the hip impingement morphology with arthroscopic osteochondroplasty versus arthroscopic lavage on pain, function, and quality of life in adults aged 18–50 years diagnosed with non-arthritic FAI at one year. FIRST was a large definitive RCT (NCT01623843) enrolling patients with FAI requiring surgical intervention across 11 international clinical sites. Participants were randomized to either arthroscopic osteochondroplasty (shaving of bone) or lavage (washing the joint of painful inflammation debris). The primary outcome was patient-reported pain within one year of the initial surgery measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes included function, health utility, and health-related quality of life using several general and hip-centric health questionnaires. An independent, blinded adjudication committee evaluated the quality of surgery, re-operations, and other patient complications. Patients and data analysts were blinded to the treatment groups. Two-hundred and twenty participants were enrolled into the FIRST trial over a six-year period (pilot phase: N=50, from 2012–2013 and definitive phase: N=170, from 2015–2018) at 11 clinical sites in Canada, Finland, and Denmark. The FIRST results will be released at the ISAKOS annual meeting as follows. The absolute difference in rate of pain reduction between groups was XX (95% CI: YY-YY, p=X). The mean differences of the Short-Form 12 (SF-12, MCS and PCS), Hip Outcome Score (HOS), International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12), and EuroQol 5-Dimensions (EQ-5D) between groups are XX (95% CI: YY-YY, p=X)…, respectively. Reoperations occurred in XX of 220 (X%) patients over the one-year follow up period (OR:XX, 95% CI: YY-YY, p=X) and the patients treated with arthroscopic osteochondroplasty conferred the following risk of reoperation within one-year compared to arthroscopic lavage (RR:XX, 95% CI: YY-YY, p=X). This RCT represents major international efforts to definitively identify the optimal treatment strategy for FAI. The results of this trial will change practice, being used to prevent chronic hip pain and loss of function caused by hip osteoarthritis.
To assess the current literature on suture anchor placement for the purpose of identifying factors that lead to suture anchor perforation and techniques that reduce the likelihood of complications. Three databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE) were searched, and two reviewers independently screened the resulting literature. Methodological quality of all included papers was assessed using Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment tool. Results are presented in a narrative summary fashion using descriptive statistics. Fourteen studies were included in this review. Four case series (491 patients, 56.6% female, mean age 33.9 years), nine controlled cadaveric/laboratory studies (111 cadaveric hips and 12 sawbones, 42.2% female, mean age 60.0 years), and one randomized controlled trial (37 hips, 55.6% female, mean age 34.2 years) were included. Anterior cortical perforation by suture anchors led to pain and impingement of pelvic neurovascular structures. The anterior acetabular positions (three to four o'clock) had the thinnest bone, smallest rim angles, and highest incidence of articular perforation. Drilling angles from 10° to 20° measured off the coronal plane were acceptable. The mid-anterior (MA) and distal anterolateral (DALA) portals were used successfully, with some studies reporting difficulty placing anchors at anterior locations via the DALA portal. Small-diameter (< 1 .8-mm) suture anchors had a lower in vivo incidence of articular perforation with similar stability and pull-out strength in biomechanical studies. Suture anchors at anterior acetabular rim positions (3–4 o'clock) should be inserted with caution. Large-diameter (>2.3-mm) suture anchors increase the likelihood of articular perforation without increasing labral stability. Inserting small-diameter (< 1 .8-mm) all-suture suture anchors (ASAs) from 10° to 20° using curved suture anchor drill guides, may increase safe insertion angles from all cutaneous portals. Direct arthroscopic visualization, use of fluoroscopy, distal-proximal insertion, and the use of nitinol wire can help prevent articular violation.
Shoulder impingement is one of the most common non-traumatic upper limb causes of disability in adults. Often resulting in pain and disability, management remains highly debated. This meta-analysis of randomized trials aims to evaluate the efficacy of surgical intervention in the setting of shoulder impingement in comparison to non-operative or sham treatments. Two reviewers independently screened MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED and Cochrane databases for randomized control trials published from 1946 through to May 19th, 2018. A risk of bias assessment was conducted for all included studies and outcomes were pooled using a random effects model. The primary outcome was improvement in pain up to two years. Secondary outcomes included functional outcome scores reported at the short term (/=2 years). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2statistic. Functional outcome scores were presented along with minimal clinically important differences to provide clinical context to findings. Twelve RCT's (n=1062 patients) were included in this review. Eligible patients were a mean age of 48 (SD +/− 4) years with 45% being male gender. The pooled treatment effect of surgical intervention for shoulder impingement did not demonstrate any benefit to surgery with respect to pain relief (mean difference [MD] −0.07, 95% CI −0.40 to 0.26) or short-term functional outcomes (standardized mean difference [SMD] −0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.27 to 0.08). Surgical intervention did result in a small statistically significant but clinically unimportant improvement in long term functional outcomes (SMD 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.41). Evidence suggests surgical intervention has little, if any, benefit for impingement pathology in the middle-aged patient.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the existing literature from 2005 to 2016 reporting on the efficacy of surgical management of patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) secondary to slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched and screened in duplicate. Data such as patient demographics, surgical technique, surgical outcomes and complications were retrieved from eligible studies.Objectives
Methods
Hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip dysplasia is controversial in the orthopaedic community, as the outcome literature has been variable and inconclusive. We hypothesise that outcomes of hip arthroscopy may be diminished in the setting of hip dysplasia, but outcomes may be acceptable in milder or borderline cases of hip dysplasia. A systematic search was performed in duplicate for studies investigating the outcome of hip arthroscopy in the setting of hip dysplasia up to July 2015. Study parameters including sample size, definition of dysplasia, outcomes measures, and re-operation rates were obtained. Furthermore, the levels of evidence of studies were collected and quality assessment was performed.Objective
Methods