Editorial Commentary: Repair of Lateral Ankle Ligament: Is Arthroscopic Technique the Next Station?

Arthroscopic lateral ankle ligament repair (ALALR) is safe and effective, yet a review of the current literature does not show the superiority of ALALR over the open technique. ALALR is a relatively new procedure, and, in the future, it is likely that arthroscopic rather than open lateral ankle ligament repair will become the standard of care.     

Editorial Commentary: Biceps Tendon Tenderness… Is It Enough to Guide Surgical Management?

Pathology of the long head of the biceps tendon is often encountered concurrently with rotator cuff tears. Although both preoperative and intraoperative evaluations may play a role in the decision-making process of when and how to treat the biceps, it can still be a conundrum. The more straightforward tests and reliable evaluation methods we have in our repertoire, the more likely the appropriate treatment choice to address the pathology will be made. The subpectoral biceps test is a helpful examination maneuver as part of the preoperative biceps evaluation.     

Ankle Arthroscopy: Is Preoperative Marking of the Superficial Peroneal Nerve Important?

The aim of this study was to see whether preoperative marking of the superficial peroneal nerve and its branches before anterior ankle arthroscopy reduced the incidence of nerve injury compared with the available evidence reported in the literature. We reviewed 100 consecutive cases of anterior ankle arthroscopy that had been performed between February 2005 and April 2009. The medical records for all of the patients were reviewed for any documented complications related to the arthroscopic procedure. The patients were interviewed by telephone to find out if they had experienced any temporary or long-term neurologic symptoms after the surgery, and any patient with symptoms suggestive of a neurologic complication was thereafter physically examined in the clinic. A total of 96 (96%) of the patients were followed up for a mean of 15.3 (range 1 to 39) months, and the incidence of post-arthroscopy injury to the superficial peroneal nerve or its branches was 1.04% (1 out of 96 cases). Based on our observations, we believe that marking the superficial peroneal nerve and its branches before anterior ankle arthroscopy is an important and effective way to decrease the risk of iatrogenic nerve injury.     

Editorial Commentary: Evidence-Based Guidelines for Management of the Hip Capsule During Arthroscopy: Has It Become Personal?

The management of the capsule during hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome has been in the spotlight during the last decade. Although there is robust biomechanical evidence that preserving the anatomic integrity of the iliofemoral ligament is important for the stability of the hip joint, the effect of capsular management on patient outcomes is often debated in clinical studies. Mid-term and long-term follow-up studies have shown that capsular closure is associated with decreased risk of hip arthroscopy failure, but no difference in patient outcomes based on capsular management has been found by some case series studies. What is driving the controversy in the literature? It seems to stem from the variation in surgical techniques used to perform hip capsulotomy or capsular repair, worldwide. Given that improvement in patient outcomes must be prioritized, it is time to use the existing knowledge appropriately to establish evidence-based guidelines for the management of hip capsule during hip arthroscopy.     

Editorial Commentary: Is Back Pain Killing Your Hip Arthroscopy Outcomes?

The identification of factors associated with inferior postoperative outcomes after hip arthroscopy is critical as we try to further clarify indications for hip arthroscopy. Recent arthroplasty studies have shown worse outcomes after hip and knee replacement in patients with comorbid joint and spine pain. Recent evidence has shown this to be true in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy as well. This evidence helps surgeons counsel patients better preoperatively and manage their expectations postoperatively. Patients with comorbid joint and spine pain should expect improvements in pain and function after hip arthroscopy; however, the overall functional outcomes are worse than those in patients without these comorbid conditions.     

Editorial Commentary: The Importance of Capsular Closure in Hip Arthroscopy: Is There a Limit to the Benefit?

Capsular closure is an important concept in hip arthroscopy and should be performed in nearly all patients. However, in patients with stiff hips and borderline arthritic changes, leaving the capsule unrepaired or performing a partial repair in the setting of a T-capsulotomy could result in successful outcomes.     

Editorial Commentary: Knee Arthroscopy: How Fast Is Too Fast? How Slow Is Too Slow?

Although the quality of knee arthroscopy is not determined with a stopwatch, in general, an operation should not take significantly longer than average for a routine and uncomplicated procedure. On the other hand, rushing through an operation is never acceptable. Hurrying to complete an operation to meet a given time standard is not only undesirable, but also unsafe for the patient.     

Editorial Commentary: Hip Arthroscopy—A Microcosm in the Evolution of Arthroscopy in Sports Medicine

Hip arthroscopy represents a microcosm in the evolution of arthroscopy within sports medicine. It has evolved right before our eyes over a condensed time frame with current-day techniques in arthroscopy and concepts in sports medicine. Early on, arthroscopy identified labral tears and other painful problems that had previously gone unrecognized and untreated because open procedures were rarely performed for these poorly defined conditions. The evolution of hip arthroscopy changed when femoroacetabular impingement was described and open surgical procedures were used for treatment. Open procedures for the hip, like the knee and shoulder before it, then evolved to less invasive arthroscopic methods. Techniques, technology, and understanding of hip disorders have all evolved simultaneously, resulting in a quickly changing landscape in the role of arthroscopy. And an improved focus has been gained on disorders other than femoroacetabular impingement that can lead to hip problems. This evolution is not novel because we have seen it in other joints, as well as among other general surgical procedures; most important, this evolution is not complete. Miles to go before we sleep.     

Editorial Commentary: Hip Arthroscopy in an Aging Patient Population—Is 50 the New 40?

As the field of hip arthroscopy expands, in combination with an aging population that remains active into its later years, more outcome studies will be needed to better understand the efficacy and applicability of hip preservation in this patient population.     

Editorial Commentary: How Far Can the Arthroscope Reach in the Ankle Joint?

Surgical access to pathology of the talar dome (e.g., osteochondral lesions of the talus) can be limited because of the ankle joint congruity. When considering arthroscopic treatment, anterior arthroscopy with the ankle in plantar flexion or posterior arthroscopy with the ankle in dorsiflexion is used. The surgeon should carefully assess different clinical and radiologic aspects to plan the optimal operative approach. Meticulous physical examination, including ankle range of motion and possible palpation of a talar lesion, in combination with exact lesion localization on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging usually provide sufficient preoperative information. Most lesions with the anterior border localized on or anterior to the midline of the talus are accessible by anterior arthroscopy. In the case of preoperative doubt concerning the intraoperative accessibility, a computed tomography scan of the ankle in full plantarflexion is used to mirror arthroscopic reachability. Intraoperative surgical tricks to increase accessibility to the lesion may consist of an adjunct soft-tissue distraction device, reduction of the distal tibial rim, and treating the lesion from anteriorly to posteriorly, thereby gaining further exposure to the lesion throughout the procedure.     

Editorial Commentary: Rising Interest in “Big Data” in Arthroscopy: Is the Juice Worth the Squeeze?

The use of “big data” in orthopaedic sports medicine research is on the rise. Greater access to data sources that allow for analysis of outpatient procedures has contributed to this surge. Important advantages and disadvantages to each database exist and should be understood to properly interpret these studies. In the era of value-based medicine, this macro data will drive policy and payment.     

Editorial Commentary: Spine Pathology May Compromise the Results of Hip Arthroscopy: Will Hip Arthroscopy Improve Low Back Pain?

Pathology of the lumbar spine and hip commonly occur concurrently. The hip–spine connection has been well documented in the hip arthroplasty literature but until recently has been largely ignored in the setting of hip arthroscopy. Physical examination and diagnostic workup of the lumbosacral junction are warranted to further our understanding of the effects of lumbosacral motion and pathology in patients with concomitant femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. An understanding of this relationship will better allow surgeons to counsel and preoperatively optimize patients undergoing evaluation and treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Several studies have reported that patients with a previous lumbar arthrodesis undergoing hip arthroplasty have lower patient-reported outcomes and greater revision rates compared with patients without previous lumbar surgery, and similar to its effect on outcomes after hip arthroplasty, lumbar spine disease can compromise outcomes after hip arthroscopy. On the other side of the coin, hip arthroplasty has been shown to improve low back pain in patients with concomitant hip osteoarthritis. Can the arthroscopic treatment of nonarthritic hip pathology offer a similar result? We won't know unless we look.     

Editorial Commentary: What Is the Optimal Management of First and Recurrent Patellar Instability? Patellofemoral Instability Management Continues to Evolve

Patellar instability patients may present for evaluation after their first instability episode or after recurrent episodes. Current management differs for these 2 groups. The accepted “common denominator” of patellar instability is the medial patellofemoral ligament, or medial patellar restraints, to be more all-encompassing. These patients often have multiple contributing comorbidities (e.g., trochlear dysplasia, patellar alta, excessive lateral position of tibial tubercle). Historically, the recommended treatment for a first-time patellar dislocation was nonoperative because medial soft tissue repairs had not been proven more effective. Indications for primary repair of the medial patellar restraints are a single discrete tear identified on magnetic resonance imaging. In the case of recurrent patellar instability, medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction, rather than repair/reef, has been the recommended approach. The keys to reconstruction remain: honor the anatomy and avoid overconstraint of the patella. For first time dislocation patients with trochlear dysplasia, patellar alta, and age <25 years, recurrent instability is common.     

Editorial Commentary: Readmission Rate After Hip Arthroscopy: Is There a Cause for Concern?

Readmission after hip arthroscopic surgery is an undesired and unusual event. The causes may range from wound-related issues, deep infection, increasing pain, complications of surgery, to medical events. It adds to the economic burden of the procedure and causes unnecessary anguish to the patients and indeed clinicians. It is also one of the less-studied areas of hip arthroscopic surgery because of its rarity. There would be benefit in being able to identify the risk factors of readmission such that pre-emptive measures can be put in place to prevent or indeed counsel the patients before the surgery. In certain cases, readmission may remain an unpreventable event. In our experience, the readmission rate after hip arthroscopy is 0.5%, whereas patients with elevated body mass index are at greater risk.     

Editorial Commentary: Safe Innovation? Arthroscopy After Traumatic Hip Dislocation

Hip arthroscopy can be helpful relative to conventional imaging when diagnosing (and treating) intra-articular injuries after a hip dislocation, but more evidence is required before adopting this approach diagnostic and therapeutic strategy.