Although total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has proved to be a reliable solution in older patients, treatment in younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis remains controversial, and there are still few reliable long-term surgical options.^1-8 These options include abrasion arthroplasty and arthroscopic management,^9,10 biologic glenoid resurfacing,^11,12 and humeral hemiarthroplasty with¹³ or without^14,15 glenoid treatment and anatomical TSA.

In the younger cohort, 20-year TSA survivorship rates up to 84% have been reported, and unsatisfactory subjective outcomes have been unacceptably high.¹⁶ In addition, there is a paucity of literature addressing the impact of TSA on return to sport. Recommendations on returning to an athletic life style are based largely on surveys of expert opinion^17,18 and heterogeneous studies of either older patients (eg, age >50-55 years) who are active^19-21 or younger patients with no defined level of activity.^{5,7,8,16,22-24}

To our knowledge, no one has evaluated the short-term morbidity and clinical outcomes within a young, high-demand patient population, such as the US military. Therefore, we conducted a study to evaluate the clinical success and complications of TSA performed for glenohumeral arthritis in a young, active population. We hypothesized that patients who had undergone TSA would have a low rate of return to duty, an increased rate of component failure, and a higher reoperation rate because of increased upper extremity demands.

Materials and Methods

After obtaining protocol approval from the William Beaumont Army Medical Center Institutional Review Board, we searched the Military Health System (MHS) Management Analysis and Reporting Tool (M2) database to retrospectively review the cases of all tri-service US military service members who had undergone primary anatomical TSA (Current Procedural Terminology code 23472) between January 1, 2007 and June 31, 2014. This was a multisurgeon, multicenter study. Patient exclusion criteria were nonmilitary or retired status at time of surgery; primary surgery consisting of limited glenohumeral resurfacing procedure, hemiarthroplasty, or reverse TSA; surgery for acute proximal humerus fracture; rotator cuff deficiency diagnosed before or during surgery; and insufficient follow-up (eg, <12 months, unless medically separated beforehand).

The M2 database is an established tool that has been used for clinical outcomes research on treatment of a variety of orthopedic conditions.25,26 The Medical Data Repository, which is operated by MHS, is populated by its military healthcare providers. The MHS, which offers worldwide coverage for all beneficiaries either at Department of Defense facilities or purchased using civilian providers, is among the largest known closed healthcare systems.

All active-duty US military service members are uniformly required to adhere to stringent and regularly evaluated physical fitness standards, which typically exceed those of average civilians. Routine physical training is required in the form of aerobic fitness, weight training, tactical field exercises, and core military tasks, such as the ability to march at least 2 miles while carrying heavy fighting loads. In addition to satisfying required height and weight standards, all service members are subject to semiannual service-specific physical fitness evaluations inclusive of timed push-ups, sit-ups, and an aerobic event. Service members may also be required to maintain a level of physical training above these baseline standards, contingent on their branch of service, rank, and military occupational specialty. If a service member is unable to maintain these standards, medical separation may be initiated.

Demographic and occupational data were extracted from the database. These data included age, sex, military rank, and branch of service. Line-by-line analysis of the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (Version 22; 3M) electronic medical record was then performed to confirm the underlying diagnosis, surgical procedure, and surgery date. Further chart review yielded additional patient-based factors (eg, laterality, hand dominance, presence and type of prior shoulder surgeries) and surgical factors (eg, surgery indication, implant design). We evaluated clinical and functional outcomes as well as perioperative complications, including both major and minor systemic and local complications as previously described^27,28; preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM) and self-reported pain score (SRPS, scale 1-10) as measured by physical therapist and surgeon at follow-up; secondary surgical interventions; timing of return to duty; and postoperative deployment history. The primary outcome measures were revision reoperation after index procedure, and military discharge for persistent shoulder-related disability. Clinical failure was defined as component failure or reoperation. Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) is a formal separation from the military in which it is deemed that a service member is no longer able to fulfill his or her duty because of a medical condition.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were compared using statistical means with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and/or SDs. Categorical data were reported as frequencies or percentages. Univariate analysis was performed to assess the correlation between possible risk factors and the primary outcome measures. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Demographics

We identified 24 service members (26 shoulders) who had undergone anatomical TSA during the study period (Table 1). Mean (SD) age was 45.8 (4.5) years (range, 35-54 years), and the cohort was predominately male (25/26 shoulders; 96.2%). Most cohort members were of senior enlisted rank (14, 58.3%), and the US Army was the predominant branch of military service (13, 54.2%). The right side was the operative extremity in 7 cases (26.9%), and the dominant shoulder was involved in 6 cases (23.1%). Two patients (8.3%) underwent staged bilateral TSA. Most patients (76.9%) underwent TSA on the nondominant extremity.

Surgical Variables

TSA was indicated for post-instability arthropathy in 13 cases (50.0%), posttraumatic osteoarthritis in 7 cases (26.9%), and unspecified glenohumeral arthritis, which includes primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis, in 5 cases (19.2%) (Table 2). One case was attributed to iatrogenically induced chondrolysis secondary to intra-articular lidocaine pump. Twelve patients (46.2%) had at least 1 previous surgery. Of the shoulders with instability, 10 (76.9%) had undergone a total of 14 surgical stabilization procedures—10 anterior labral repairs, 2 posterior labral repairs, and 2 capsular plications. The other shoulders had undergone a total of 18 procedures, which included 4 rotator cuff repairs and 3 cartilage restoration procedures.

Clinical Outcomes

Mean (SD) follow-up was 41.0 (21.3) months (range, 11.6-97.6 months). All but 1 shoulder (96.2%) had follow-up of 12 months or more (the only patient with shorter follow-up was because of MEB), and 76.9% of patients had follow-up of 24 months or more (4 of the 6 patients with follow-up under 24 months were medically separated) (Table 3). In all cases, mean ROM improved with respect to flexion, abduction, and external rotation. At final follow-up, mean (SD) ROM was 138° (36°) forward flexion (range, 60°-180°), 125° (39°) abduction (range, 45°-180°), 48° (19°) external rotation at 0° abduction (range, 20°-90°), and 80° (9.4°) external rotation at 90° abduction (range, 70°-90°). Preoperative flexion, abduction, and external rotation at 0° and 90° abduction were all improved at final follow-up. The most improvement in ROM occurred within 6 months after surgery.

Overall patient satisfaction with surgery was 92.3% (n = 24). Ultimately, 18 (72.0%) of 25 shoulders with follow-up of 1 year or more were able to return to active duty within 1 year after surgery, though only 10 (45.5%) of 22 with follow-up of 2 years or more remained active 2 years after surgery. Furthermore, 5 patients (20.8%) were deployed after surgery, and all were still on active duty at final follow-up. By final follow-up, 9 (37.5%) of 24 service members were unable to return to military function; 7 had been medically discharged from the military for persistent shoulder disability, and 2 were in the process of being medically discharged.

In all cases, SRPS improved from before surgery (5.2 out of 10) to final follow-up (1.4). At final follow-up, 22 patients (88.0%) reported mild pain (0-3), and no one had pain above 6.

Complications

Nine patients had a total of 12 postoperative complications (46.2%): 6 component failures (23.1%), 2 neurologic injuries (7.7%; 1 permanent axillary nerve injury, 1 transient brachial plexus neuritis), 2 cases of adhesive capsulitis (7.7%), and 2 episodes of venous thrombosis (7.7%; 1 superficial, 1 deep) (Table 4). There were no documented infections. Six reoperations (23.1%) were performed for the 6 component failures (2 traumatic dislocations of prosthesis resulting in acute glenoid component failure, 3 cases of atraumatic glenoid loosening, 1 case of humeral stem loosening after periprosthetic fracture). Atraumatic glenoid component loosening occurred a mean (SD) of 40.6 (14.2) months after surgery (range, 20.8-54.2 months).

Surgical Failures

Eight service members underwent MEB. Six patients experienced component failure. Factors contributing to both clinical failure and separation from active duty by means of MEB were evaluated with univariate analysis (Table 5). No statistically significant risk factors, including surgical revision and presence of perioperative complications, were identified.

Discussion

We confirmed that our cohort of young service members (mean age, 45.8 years), who had undergone TSA for glenohumeral arthritis, had a relatively higher rate of component failure (23.1%) and a higher reoperation rate (23.1%) with low rates of return to military duty at short-term to midterm follow-up. Our results parallel those of a limited series with a younger cohort (Table 6).^{7,16,19,21,23,24} The high demand and increased life expectancy of the younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis potentiates the risk of complications, component loosening, and ultimate failure.²⁹ To our knowledge, the present article is the first to report clinical and functional outcomes and perioperative risk profiles in a homogenously young, active military cohort after TSA.

The mean age of our study population (46 years) is one of the lowest in the literature. TSA in younger patients (age, <50-55 years) and older, active patients (>55 years) has received increased attention as a result of the expanding indications and growing popularity of TSA in these groups. Other studies have upheld the efficacy of TSA in achieving predictable pain relief and functional improvement in a diverse and predominantly elderly population.^15,30-34 Alternative treatments, including humeral head resurfacing^15,30,35 and soft-tissue interposition,^15,36-40 have also shown inferior short- and long-term results in terms of longevity and degree of clinical or functional improvement.^31-34,41 In addition, the ream-and-run technique has had promising early results by improving glenohumeral kinematics, pain relief, and shoulder function.^13,42,43 However, although implantation of a glenoid component is avoided in young, active people because of reduced longevity and higher rates of component failure, the trade-offs are inadequately treated glenoid disease, suboptimal pain relief, and progression of glenoid arthritis eventually requiring revision. Furthermore, midterm and long-term survivorship of TSA in general is unknown, and there remain few good options for treating end-stage arthritis in young, active patients.

Our cohort had high rates of complications (46.2%) and revisions (23.1%). Two in 5 patients had postoperative complications, most commonly component failure resulting in reoperation. In the literature, complication rates among young patients who underwent TSA are much lower (4.8%-10.9%).^16,23,24 Our cohort’s most common complication was component failure (23.1%), which was most often attributed to atraumatic, aseptic glenoid component loosening and required reoperation. Previously reported revision rates in a young population that underwent TSA (0%-11%)^16,23,24 were also significantly lower than those in the present analysis (23.1%), underscoring the impact of operative indications, postoperative activity levels, and occupational demands on ultimate failure rates. Interestingly, all revisions in our study were for component failure, whereas previous reports have described a higher rate for infection.²² However, the same studies also found glenoid lucency rates as high as 76% at 10-year follow-up.¹⁶ Furthermore, in a review of 136 TSAs with unsatisfactory outcomes, glenoid loosening was the most common reason for presenting to clinic after surgery.⁴⁴ Specifically, our population had a high rate of glenohumeral arthritis secondary to instability (50.0%) and posttraumatic osteoarthritis (26.9%). For many reasons, outcomes were worse in younger patients with a history of glenohumeral instability³³ than in older patients without a high incidence of instability.⁴⁵ This young cohort with higher demands may have had accelerated polyethylene wear patterns caused by repetitive overhead activity, which may have arisen because of a higher functional profile after surgery and greater patient expectations after arthroplasty. In addition, patients with a history of instability may have altered glenohumeral anatomy, especially with previous arthroscopic or open stabilization procedures. Anatomical changes include excessive posterior glenoid wear, internal rotation contracture, patulous capsular tissue, static or dynamic posterior humeral subluxation, and possible overconstraint after prior stabilization procedures. Almost half of our population had a previous surgery; our patients averaged 1.7 previous surgeries each.

Although estimates of component survivorship at a high-volume civilian tertiary-referral center were as high as 97% at 10 years and 84% at 20 years,^7,16 10-year survivorship in patients with a history of instability was only 61%.3 TSA survivorship in our young, active cohort is already foreseeably dramatically reduced, given the 23.1% revision rate at 28.5-month follow-up. This consideration must be addressed during preoperative counseling with the young patient with glenohumeral arthritis and a history of shoulder instability.

Despite the high rates of complications and revisions in our study, 92.3% of patients were satisfied with surgery, 88.0% experienced minimal persistence of pain (mean 3.8-point decrease on SRPS), and 100% maintained improved ROM at final follow-up. Satisfaction in the young population has varied significantly, from 52% to 95%, generally on the basis of physical activity.^16,22-24 The reasonable rate of postoperative satisfaction in the present analysis is comparable to what has been reported in patients of a similar age (Table 6).^7,16,22 However, despite high satisfaction and pain relief, patients were inconsistently able to return to the upper limits of physical activity required of active-duty military service. In addition, we cannot exclude secondary gain motivations for pursuing medical retirement, similar to that seen in patients receiving worker’s compensation.

Other authors have conversely found more favorable functional outcomes and survivorship rates.^23,24 In a retrospective review of 46 TSAs in patients 55 years or younger, Bartelt and colleagues²⁴ found sustained improvements in pain, ROM, and satisfaction at 7-year follow-up.24 Raiss and colleagues²³ conducted a prospective study of TSA outcomes in 21 patients with a mean age of 55 years and a mean follow-up of 7 years and reported no revisions and only 1 minor complication, a transient brachial plexus palsy.²³ The discrepancy between these studies may reflect different activity levels and underlying pathology between cohorts. The present population is unique in that it represents a particularly difficult confluence of factors for shoulder arthroplasty surgeons. The high activity, significant overhead and lifting occupational demands, and discordant patient expectations of this military cohort place a significant functional burden on the implants, the glenoid component in particular. Furthermore, this patient group has a higher incidence of more complex glenohumeral pathology resulting in instability, posttraumatic, or capsulorrhaphy arthropathy, and multiple prior arthroscopic and open stabilization procedures.

At final follow-up, only 33% of our patients were still on activity duty, 37.5% had completed or were completing medical separation from the military after surgery for persistent shoulder disability, and 37.5% were retired from the military. Five patients (20.8%) deployed after surgery. This young, active cohort of service members who had TSA for glenohumeral arthritis faced a unique set of tremendous physical demands. A retrospective case series investigated return to sport in 100 consecutive patients (mean age, 68.9 years) who were participating in recreational and competitive athletics and underwent unilateral TSA.²¹ The patients were engaged most commonly in swimming (20.4%), golf (16.3%), cycling (16.3%), and fitness training (16.3%). The authors found that, at a mean follow-up of 2.8 years, 49 patients (89%) were able to continue in sports, though 36.7% thought their sport activity was restricted after TSA. In another retrospective case series (61 TSAs), McCarty and colleagues¹⁹ found that 48 patients (71%) were improved in their sports participation, and 50% increased their frequency of participation after surgery.

There are no specific recommendations on returning to military service or high-level sport after surgery. Recommendations on returning to sport after TSA have been based largely on small case series involving specific sports^46,47 and surveys of expert opinion.^17,18 In a survey on postoperative physical activity in young patients after TSA conducted by Healy and colleagues,¹⁷ 35 American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons members recommended avoiding contact and impact sports while permitting return to nonimpact sports, such as swimming, which may still impart significant stress to the glenohumeral joint. In an international survey of 101 shoulder and elbow surgeons, Magnussen and colleagues¹⁸ also found that most recommended avoiding a return to impact sports that require intensive upper extremity demands and permitting full return to sports at preoperative levels. This likely is a result of the perception that most of these patients having TSA are older and have less rigorous involvement in sports at the outset and a lower propensity for adverse patient outcomes. However, these recommendations may place a younger, more high-demand patient at significantly greater risk. The active-duty cohort engages in daily physical training, including push-ups and frequent overhead lifting, which could account for the high failure rates and low incidence of postoperative deployment. Although TSA seems to demonstrate good initial results in terms of return to high-demand activities, the return-to-duty profile in our study highlights the potential pitfalls of TSA in active individuals attempting to return to high-demand preoperative function.

Our analysis was limited by the fact that we used a small patient cohort, contributing to underpowered analysis of the potential risk factors predictive of reoperation and medical discharge. Although our minimum follow-up was 12 months, with the exception of 1 patient who was medically separated at 11.6 months because of shoulder disability, we captured 5 patients (19.2%) who underwent medical separation but who would otherwise be excluded. Therefore, this limitation is not major in that, with a longer minimum follow-up, we would be excluding a significant number of patients with such persistent disability after TSA that they would not be able to return to duty at anywhere near their previous level. In this retrospective study, we were additionally limited to analysis of the data in the medical records and could not control for variables such as surgeon technique, implant choice, and experience. Complete radiographic images were not available, limiting analysis of radiographic outcomes. Given the lack of a standardized preoperative imaging protocol, we could not evaluate glenoid version on axial imaging. It is possible that some patients with early aseptic glenoid loosening had posterior subluxation or a Walch B2 glenoid, which has a higher failure rate.⁴⁸ The strengths of this study include its unique analysis of a homogeneous young, active, high-risk patient cohort within a closed healthcare system. In the military, these patients are subject to intense daily physical and occupational demands. In addition, the clinical and functional outcomes we studied are patient-centered and therefore relevant during preoperative counseling. Further investigations might focus on validated outcome measures and on midterm to long-term TSA outcomes in an active military population vis-à-vis other alternatives for clinical management.

Conclusion

By a mean follow-up of 3.5 years, only a third of the service members had returned to active duty, roughly a third had retired, and more than a third had been medically discharged because of persistent disability attributable to the shoulder. Despite initial improvements in ROM and pain, midterm outcomes were poor. The short-term complication rate (46.2%) and the rate of reoperation for component failure (23.1%) should be emphasized during preoperative counseling.

Although total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has proved to be a reliable solution in older patients, treatment in younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis remains controversial, and there are still few reliable long-term surgical options.^1-8 These options include abrasion arthroplasty and arthroscopic management,^9,10 biologic glenoid resurfacing,^11,12 and humeral hemiarthroplasty with¹³ or without^14,15 glenoid treatment and anatomical TSA.

In the younger cohort, 20-year TSA survivorship rates up to 84% have been reported, and unsatisfactory subjective outcomes have been unacceptably high.¹⁶ In addition, there is a paucity of literature addressing the impact of TSA on return to sport. Recommendations on returning to an athletic life style are based largely on surveys of expert opinion^17,18 and heterogeneous studies of either older patients (eg, age >50-55 years) who are active^19-21 or younger patients with no defined level of activity.^{5,7,8,16,22-24}

To our knowledge, no one has evaluated the short-term morbidity and clinical outcomes within a young, high-demand patient population, such as the US military. Therefore, we conducted a study to evaluate the clinical success and complications of TSA performed for glenohumeral arthritis in a young, active population. We hypothesized that patients who had undergone TSA would have a low rate of return to duty, an increased rate of component failure, and a higher reoperation rate because of increased upper extremity demands.

Materials and Methods

After obtaining protocol approval from the William Beaumont Army Medical Center Institutional Review Board, we searched the Military Health System (MHS) Management Analysis and Reporting Tool (M2) database to retrospectively review the cases of all tri-service US military service members who had undergone primary anatomical TSA (Current Procedural Terminology code 23472) between January 1, 2007 and June 31, 2014. This was a multisurgeon, multicenter study. Patient exclusion criteria were nonmilitary or retired status at time of surgery; primary surgery consisting of limited glenohumeral resurfacing procedure, hemiarthroplasty, or reverse TSA; surgery for acute proximal humerus fracture; rotator cuff deficiency diagnosed before or during surgery; and insufficient follow-up (eg, <12 months, unless medically separated beforehand).

The M2 database is an established tool that has been used for clinical outcomes research on treatment of a variety of orthopedic conditions.25,26 The Medical Data Repository, which is operated by MHS, is populated by its military healthcare providers. The MHS, which offers worldwide coverage for all beneficiaries either at Department of Defense facilities or purchased using civilian providers, is among the largest known closed healthcare systems.

All active-duty US military service members are uniformly required to adhere to stringent and regularly evaluated physical fitness standards, which typically exceed those of average civilians. Routine physical training is required in the form of aerobic fitness, weight training, tactical field exercises, and core military tasks, such as the ability to march at least 2 miles while carrying heavy fighting loads. In addition to satisfying required height and weight standards, all service members are subject to semiannual service-specific physical fitness evaluations inclusive of timed push-ups, sit-ups, and an aerobic event. Service members may also be required to maintain a level of physical training above these baseline standards, contingent on their branch of service, rank, and military occupational specialty. If a service member is unable to maintain these standards, medical separation may be initiated.

Demographic and occupational data were extracted from the database. These data included age, sex, military rank, and branch of service. Line-by-line analysis of the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (Version 22; 3M) electronic medical record was then performed to confirm the underlying diagnosis, surgical procedure, and surgery date. Further chart review yielded additional patient-based factors (eg, laterality, hand dominance, presence and type of prior shoulder surgeries) and surgical factors (eg, surgery indication, implant design). We evaluated clinical and functional outcomes as well as perioperative complications, including both major and minor systemic and local complications as previously described^27,28; preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM) and self-reported pain score (SRPS, scale 1-10) as measured by physical therapist and surgeon at follow-up; secondary surgical interventions; timing of return to duty; and postoperative deployment history. The primary outcome measures were revision reoperation after index procedure, and military discharge for persistent shoulder-related disability. Clinical failure was defined as component failure or reoperation. Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) is a formal separation from the military in which it is deemed that a service member is no longer able to fulfill his or her duty because of a medical condition.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were compared using statistical means with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and/or SDs. Categorical data were reported as frequencies or percentages. Univariate analysis was performed to assess the correlation between possible risk factors and the primary outcome measures. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Demographics

We identified 24 service members (26 shoulders) who had undergone anatomical TSA during the study period (Table 1). Mean (SD) age was 45.8 (4.5) years (range, 35-54 years), and the cohort was predominately male (25/26 shoulders; 96.2%). Most cohort members were of senior enlisted rank (14, 58.3%), and the US Army was the predominant branch of military service (13, 54.2%). The right side was the operative extremity in 7 cases (26.9%), and the dominant shoulder was involved in 6 cases (23.1%). Two patients (8.3%) underwent staged bilateral TSA. Most patients (76.9%) underwent TSA on the nondominant extremity.

Surgical Variables

TSA was indicated for post-instability arthropathy in 13 cases (50.0%), posttraumatic osteoarthritis in 7 cases (26.9%), and unspecified glenohumeral arthritis, which includes primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis, in 5 cases (19.2%) (Table 2). One case was attributed to iatrogenically induced chondrolysis secondary to intra-articular lidocaine pump. Twelve patients (46.2%) had at least 1 previous surgery. Of the shoulders with instability, 10 (76.9%) had undergone a total of 14 surgical stabilization procedures—10 anterior labral repairs, 2 posterior labral repairs, and 2 capsular plications. The other shoulders had undergone a total of 18 procedures, which included 4 rotator cuff repairs and 3 cartilage restoration procedures.

Clinical Outcomes

Mean (SD) follow-up was 41.0 (21.3) months (range, 11.6-97.6 months). All but 1 shoulder (96.2%) had follow-up of 12 months or more (the only patient with shorter follow-up was because of MEB), and 76.9% of patients had follow-up of 24 months or more (4 of the 6 patients with follow-up under 24 months were medically separated) (Table 3). In all cases, mean ROM improved with respect to flexion, abduction, and external rotation. At final follow-up, mean (SD) ROM was 138° (36°) forward flexion (range, 60°-180°), 125° (39°) abduction (range, 45°-180°), 48° (19°) external rotation at 0° abduction (range, 20°-90°), and 80° (9.4°) external rotation at 90° abduction (range, 70°-90°). Preoperative flexion, abduction, and external rotation at 0° and 90° abduction were all improved at final follow-up. The most improvement in ROM occurred within 6 months after surgery.

Overall patient satisfaction with surgery was 92.3% (n = 24). Ultimately, 18 (72.0%) of 25 shoulders with follow-up of 1 year or more were able to return to active duty within 1 year after surgery, though only 10 (45.5%) of 22 with follow-up of 2 years or more remained active 2 years after surgery. Furthermore, 5 patients (20.8%) were deployed after surgery, and all were still on active duty at final follow-up. By final follow-up, 9 (37.5%) of 24 service members were unable to return to military function; 7 had been medically discharged from the military for persistent shoulder disability, and 2 were in the process of being medically discharged.

In all cases, SRPS improved from before surgery (5.2 out of 10) to final follow-up (1.4). At final follow-up, 22 patients (88.0%) reported mild pain (0-3), and no one had pain above 6.

Complications

Nine patients had a total of 12 postoperative complications (46.2%): 6 component failures (23.1%), 2 neurologic injuries (7.7%; 1 permanent axillary nerve injury, 1 transient brachial plexus neuritis), 2 cases of adhesive capsulitis (7.7%), and 2 episodes of venous thrombosis (7.7%; 1 superficial, 1 deep) (Table 4). There were no documented infections. Six reoperations (23.1%) were performed for the 6 component failures (2 traumatic dislocations of prosthesis resulting in acute glenoid component failure, 3 cases of atraumatic glenoid loosening, 1 case of humeral stem loosening after periprosthetic fracture). Atraumatic glenoid component loosening occurred a mean (SD) of 40.6 (14.2) months after surgery (range, 20.8-54.2 months).

Surgical Failures

Eight service members underwent MEB. Six patients experienced component failure. Factors contributing to both clinical failure and separation from active duty by means of MEB were evaluated with univariate analysis (Table 5). No statistically significant risk factors, including surgical revision and presence of perioperative complications, were identified.

Discussion

We confirmed that our cohort of young service members (mean age, 45.8 years), who had undergone TSA for glenohumeral arthritis, had a relatively higher rate of component failure (23.1%) and a higher reoperation rate (23.1%) with low rates of return to military duty at short-term to midterm follow-up. Our results parallel those of a limited series with a younger cohort (Table 6).^{7,16,19,21,23,24} The high demand and increased life expectancy of the younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis potentiates the risk of complications, component loosening, and ultimate failure.²⁹ To our knowledge, the present article is the first to report clinical and functional outcomes and perioperative risk profiles in a homogenously young, active military cohort after TSA.

The mean age of our study population (46 years) is one of the lowest in the literature. TSA in younger patients (age, <50-55 years) and older, active patients (>55 years) has received increased attention as a result of the expanding indications and growing popularity of TSA in these groups. Other studies have upheld the efficacy of TSA in achieving predictable pain relief and functional improvement in a diverse and predominantly elderly population.^15,30-34 Alternative treatments, including humeral head resurfacing^15,30,35 and soft-tissue interposition,^15,36-40 have also shown inferior short- and long-term results in terms of longevity and degree of clinical or functional improvement.^31-34,41 In addition, the ream-and-run technique has had promising early results by improving glenohumeral kinematics, pain relief, and shoulder function.^13,42,43 However, although implantation of a glenoid component is avoided in young, active people because of reduced longevity and higher rates of component failure, the trade-offs are inadequately treated glenoid disease, suboptimal pain relief, and progression of glenoid arthritis eventually requiring revision. Furthermore, midterm and long-term survivorship of TSA in general is unknown, and there remain few good options for treating end-stage arthritis in young, active patients.

Our cohort had high rates of complications (46.2%) and revisions (23.1%). Two in 5 patients had postoperative complications, most commonly component failure resulting in reoperation. In the literature, complication rates among young patients who underwent TSA are much lower (4.8%-10.9%).^16,23,24 Our cohort’s most common complication was component failure (23.1%), which was most often attributed to atraumatic, aseptic glenoid component loosening and required reoperation. Previously reported revision rates in a young population that underwent TSA (0%-11%)^16,23,24 were also significantly lower than those in the present analysis (23.1%), underscoring the impact of operative indications, postoperative activity levels, and occupational demands on ultimate failure rates. Interestingly, all revisions in our study were for component failure, whereas previous reports have described a higher rate for infection.²² However, the same studies also found glenoid lucency rates as high as 76% at 10-year follow-up.¹⁶ Furthermore, in a review of 136 TSAs with unsatisfactory outcomes, glenoid loosening was the most common reason for presenting to clinic after surgery.⁴⁴ Specifically, our population had a high rate of glenohumeral arthritis secondary to instability (50.0%) and posttraumatic osteoarthritis (26.9%). For many reasons, outcomes were worse in younger patients with a history of glenohumeral instability³³ than in older patients without a high incidence of instability.⁴⁵ This young cohort with higher demands may have had accelerated polyethylene wear patterns caused by repetitive overhead activity, which may have arisen because of a higher functional profile after surgery and greater patient expectations after arthroplasty. In addition, patients with a history of instability may have altered glenohumeral anatomy, especially with previous arthroscopic or open stabilization procedures. Anatomical changes include excessive posterior glenoid wear, internal rotation contracture, patulous capsular tissue, static or dynamic posterior humeral subluxation, and possible overconstraint after prior stabilization procedures. Almost half of our population had a previous surgery; our patients averaged 1.7 previous surgeries each.

Although estimates of component survivorship at a high-volume civilian tertiary-referral center were as high as 97% at 10 years and 84% at 20 years,^7,16 10-year survivorship in patients with a history of instability was only 61%.3 TSA survivorship in our young, active cohort is already foreseeably dramatically reduced, given the 23.1% revision rate at 28.5-month follow-up. This consideration must be addressed during preoperative counseling with the young patient with glenohumeral arthritis and a history of shoulder instability.

Despite the high rates of complications and revisions in our study, 92.3% of patients were satisfied with surgery, 88.0% experienced minimal persistence of pain (mean 3.8-point decrease on SRPS), and 100% maintained improved ROM at final follow-up. Satisfaction in the young population has varied significantly, from 52% to 95%, generally on the basis of physical activity.^16,22-24 The reasonable rate of postoperative satisfaction in the present analysis is comparable to what has been reported in patients of a similar age (Table 6).^7,16,22 However, despite high satisfaction and pain relief, patients were inconsistently able to return to the upper limits of physical activity required of active-duty military service. In addition, we cannot exclude secondary gain motivations for pursuing medical retirement, similar to that seen in patients receiving worker’s compensation.

Other authors have conversely found more favorable functional outcomes and survivorship rates.^23,24 In a retrospective review of 46 TSAs in patients 55 years or younger, Bartelt and colleagues²⁴ found sustained improvements in pain, ROM, and satisfaction at 7-year follow-up.24 Raiss and colleagues²³ conducted a prospective study of TSA outcomes in 21 patients with a mean age of 55 years and a mean follow-up of 7 years and reported no revisions and only 1 minor complication, a transient brachial plexus palsy.²³ The discrepancy between these studies may reflect different activity levels and underlying pathology between cohorts. The present population is unique in that it represents a particularly difficult confluence of factors for shoulder arthroplasty surgeons. The high activity, significant overhead and lifting occupational demands, and discordant patient expectations of this military cohort place a significant functional burden on the implants, the glenoid component in particular. Furthermore, this patient group has a higher incidence of more complex glenohumeral pathology resulting in instability, posttraumatic, or capsulorrhaphy arthropathy, and multiple prior arthroscopic and open stabilization procedures.

At final follow-up, only 33% of our patients were still on activity duty, 37.5% had completed or were completing medical separation from the military after surgery for persistent shoulder disability, and 37.5% were retired from the military. Five patients (20.8%) deployed after surgery. This young, active cohort of service members who had TSA for glenohumeral arthritis faced a unique set of tremendous physical demands. A retrospective case series investigated return to sport in 100 consecutive patients (mean age, 68.9 years) who were participating in recreational and competitive athletics and underwent unilateral TSA.²¹ The patients were engaged most commonly in swimming (20.4%), golf (16.3%), cycling (16.3%), and fitness training (16.3%). The authors found that, at a mean follow-up of 2.8 years, 49 patients (89%) were able to continue in sports, though 36.7% thought their sport activity was restricted after TSA. In another retrospective case series (61 TSAs), McCarty and colleagues¹⁹ found that 48 patients (71%) were improved in their sports participation, and 50% increased their frequency of participation after surgery.

There are no specific recommendations on returning to military service or high-level sport after surgery. Recommendations on returning to sport after TSA have been based largely on small case series involving specific sports^46,47 and surveys of expert opinion.^17,18 In a survey on postoperative physical activity in young patients after TSA conducted by Healy and colleagues,¹⁷ 35 American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons members recommended avoiding contact and impact sports while permitting return to nonimpact sports, such as swimming, which may still impart significant stress to the glenohumeral joint. In an international survey of 101 shoulder and elbow surgeons, Magnussen and colleagues¹⁸ also found that most recommended avoiding a return to impact sports that require intensive upper extremity demands and permitting full return to sports at preoperative levels. This likely is a result of the perception that most of these patients having TSA are older and have less rigorous involvement in sports at the outset and a lower propensity for adverse patient outcomes. However, these recommendations may place a younger, more high-demand patient at significantly greater risk. The active-duty cohort engages in daily physical training, including push-ups and frequent overhead lifting, which could account for the high failure rates and low incidence of postoperative deployment. Although TSA seems to demonstrate good initial results in terms of return to high-demand activities, the return-to-duty profile in our study highlights the potential pitfalls of TSA in active individuals attempting to return to high-demand preoperative function.

Our analysis was limited by the fact that we used a small patient cohort, contributing to underpowered analysis of the potential risk factors predictive of reoperation and medical discharge. Although our minimum follow-up was 12 months, with the exception of 1 patient who was medically separated at 11.6 months because of shoulder disability, we captured 5 patients (19.2%) who underwent medical separation but who would otherwise be excluded. Therefore, this limitation is not major in that, with a longer minimum follow-up, we would be excluding a significant number of patients with such persistent disability after TSA that they would not be able to return to duty at anywhere near their previous level. In this retrospective study, we were additionally limited to analysis of the data in the medical records and could not control for variables such as surgeon technique, implant choice, and experience. Complete radiographic images were not available, limiting analysis of radiographic outcomes. Given the lack of a standardized preoperative imaging protocol, we could not evaluate glenoid version on axial imaging. It is possible that some patients with early aseptic glenoid loosening had posterior subluxation or a Walch B2 glenoid, which has a higher failure rate.⁴⁸ The strengths of this study include its unique analysis of a homogeneous young, active, high-risk patient cohort within a closed healthcare system. In the military, these patients are subject to intense daily physical and occupational demands. In addition, the clinical and functional outcomes we studied are patient-centered and therefore relevant during preoperative counseling. Further investigations might focus on validated outcome measures and on midterm to long-term TSA outcomes in an active military population vis-à-vis other alternatives for clinical management.

Conclusion

By a mean follow-up of 3.5 years, only a third of the service members had returned to active duty, roughly a third had retired, and more than a third had been medically discharged because of persistent disability attributable to the shoulder. Despite initial improvements in ROM and pain, midterm outcomes were poor. The short-term complication rate (46.2%) and the rate of reoperation for component failure (23.1%) should be emphasized during preoperative counseling.

Although total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has proved to be a reliable solution in older patients, treatment in younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis remains controversial, and there are still few reliable long-term surgical options.^1-8 These options include abrasion arthroplasty and arthroscopic management,^9,10 biologic glenoid resurfacing,^11,12 and humeral hemiarthroplasty with¹³ or without^14,15 glenoid treatment and anatomical TSA.

In the younger cohort, 20-year TSA survivorship rates up to 84% have been reported, and unsatisfactory subjective outcomes have been unacceptably high.¹⁶ In addition, there is a paucity of literature addressing the impact of TSA on return to sport. Recommendations on returning to an athletic life style are based largely on surveys of expert opinion^17,18 and heterogeneous studies of either older patients (eg, age >50-55 years) who are active^19-21 or younger patients with no defined level of activity.^{5,7,8,16,22-24}

To our knowledge, no one has evaluated the short-term morbidity and clinical outcomes within a young, high-demand patient population, such as the US military. Therefore, we conducted a study to evaluate the clinical success and complications of TSA performed for glenohumeral arthritis in a young, active population. We hypothesized that patients who had undergone TSA would have a low rate of return to duty, an increased rate of component failure, and a higher reoperation rate because of increased upper extremity demands.

Materials and Methods

After obtaining protocol approval from the William Beaumont Army Medical Center Institutional Review Board, we searched the Military Health System (MHS) Management Analysis and Reporting Tool (M2) database to retrospectively review the cases of all tri-service US military service members who had undergone primary anatomical TSA (Current Procedural Terminology code 23472) between January 1, 2007 and June 31, 2014. This was a multisurgeon, multicenter study. Patient exclusion criteria were nonmilitary or retired status at time of surgery; primary surgery consisting of limited glenohumeral resurfacing procedure, hemiarthroplasty, or reverse TSA; surgery for acute proximal humerus fracture; rotator cuff deficiency diagnosed before or during surgery; and insufficient follow-up (eg, <12 months, unless medically separated beforehand).

The M2 database is an established tool that has been used for clinical outcomes research on treatment of a variety of orthopedic conditions.25,26 The Medical Data Repository, which is operated by MHS, is populated by its military healthcare providers. The MHS, which offers worldwide coverage for all beneficiaries either at Department of Defense facilities or purchased using civilian providers, is among the largest known closed healthcare systems.

All active-duty US military service members are uniformly required to adhere to stringent and regularly evaluated physical fitness standards, which typically exceed those of average civilians. Routine physical training is required in the form of aerobic fitness, weight training, tactical field exercises, and core military tasks, such as the ability to march at least 2 miles while carrying heavy fighting loads. In addition to satisfying required height and weight standards, all service members are subject to semiannual service-specific physical fitness evaluations inclusive of timed push-ups, sit-ups, and an aerobic event. Service members may also be required to maintain a level of physical training above these baseline standards, contingent on their branch of service, rank, and military occupational specialty. If a service member is unable to maintain these standards, medical separation may be initiated.

Demographic and occupational data were extracted from the database. These data included age, sex, military rank, and branch of service. Line-by-line analysis of the Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (Version 22; 3M) electronic medical record was then performed to confirm the underlying diagnosis, surgical procedure, and surgery date. Further chart review yielded additional patient-based factors (eg, laterality, hand dominance, presence and type of prior shoulder surgeries) and surgical factors (eg, surgery indication, implant design). We evaluated clinical and functional outcomes as well as perioperative complications, including both major and minor systemic and local complications as previously described^27,28; preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM) and self-reported pain score (SRPS, scale 1-10) as measured by physical therapist and surgeon at follow-up; secondary surgical interventions; timing of return to duty; and postoperative deployment history. The primary outcome measures were revision reoperation after index procedure, and military discharge for persistent shoulder-related disability. Clinical failure was defined as component failure or reoperation. Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) is a formal separation from the military in which it is deemed that a service member is no longer able to fulfill his or her duty because of a medical condition.

Statistical Analysis

Continuous variables were compared using statistical means with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and/or SDs. Categorical data were reported as frequencies or percentages. Univariate analysis was performed to assess the correlation between possible risk factors and the primary outcome measures. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Demographics

We identified 24 service members (26 shoulders) who had undergone anatomical TSA during the study period (Table 1). Mean (SD) age was 45.8 (4.5) years (range, 35-54 years), and the cohort was predominately male (25/26 shoulders; 96.2%). Most cohort members were of senior enlisted rank (14, 58.3%), and the US Army was the predominant branch of military service (13, 54.2%). The right side was the operative extremity in 7 cases (26.9%), and the dominant shoulder was involved in 6 cases (23.1%). Two patients (8.3%) underwent staged bilateral TSA. Most patients (76.9%) underwent TSA on the nondominant extremity.

Surgical Variables

TSA was indicated for post-instability arthropathy in 13 cases (50.0%), posttraumatic osteoarthritis in 7 cases (26.9%), and unspecified glenohumeral arthritis, which includes primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis, in 5 cases (19.2%) (Table 2). One case was attributed to iatrogenically induced chondrolysis secondary to intra-articular lidocaine pump. Twelve patients (46.2%) had at least 1 previous surgery. Of the shoulders with instability, 10 (76.9%) had undergone a total of 14 surgical stabilization procedures—10 anterior labral repairs, 2 posterior labral repairs, and 2 capsular plications. The other shoulders had undergone a total of 18 procedures, which included 4 rotator cuff repairs and 3 cartilage restoration procedures.

Clinical Outcomes

Mean (SD) follow-up was 41.0 (21.3) months (range, 11.6-97.6 months). All but 1 shoulder (96.2%) had follow-up of 12 months or more (the only patient with shorter follow-up was because of MEB), and 76.9% of patients had follow-up of 24 months or more (4 of the 6 patients with follow-up under 24 months were medically separated) (Table 3). In all cases, mean ROM improved with respect to flexion, abduction, and external rotation. At final follow-up, mean (SD) ROM was 138° (36°) forward flexion (range, 60°-180°), 125° (39°) abduction (range, 45°-180°), 48° (19°) external rotation at 0° abduction (range, 20°-90°), and 80° (9.4°) external rotation at 90° abduction (range, 70°-90°). Preoperative flexion, abduction, and external rotation at 0° and 90° abduction were all improved at final follow-up. The most improvement in ROM occurred within 6 months after surgery.

Overall patient satisfaction with surgery was 92.3% (n = 24). Ultimately, 18 (72.0%) of 25 shoulders with follow-up of 1 year or more were able to return to active duty within 1 year after surgery, though only 10 (45.5%) of 22 with follow-up of 2 years or more remained active 2 years after surgery. Furthermore, 5 patients (20.8%) were deployed after surgery, and all were still on active duty at final follow-up. By final follow-up, 9 (37.5%) of 24 service members were unable to return to military function; 7 had been medically discharged from the military for persistent shoulder disability, and 2 were in the process of being medically discharged.

In all cases, SRPS improved from before surgery (5.2 out of 10) to final follow-up (1.4). At final follow-up, 22 patients (88.0%) reported mild pain (0-3), and no one had pain above 6.

Complications

Nine patients had a total of 12 postoperative complications (46.2%): 6 component failures (23.1%), 2 neurologic injuries (7.7%; 1 permanent axillary nerve injury, 1 transient brachial plexus neuritis), 2 cases of adhesive capsulitis (7.7%), and 2 episodes of venous thrombosis (7.7%; 1 superficial, 1 deep) (Table 4). There were no documented infections. Six reoperations (23.1%) were performed for the 6 component failures (2 traumatic dislocations of prosthesis resulting in acute glenoid component failure, 3 cases of atraumatic glenoid loosening, 1 case of humeral stem loosening after periprosthetic fracture). Atraumatic glenoid component loosening occurred a mean (SD) of 40.6 (14.2) months after surgery (range, 20.8-54.2 months).

Surgical Failures

Eight service members underwent MEB. Six patients experienced component failure. Factors contributing to both clinical failure and separation from active duty by means of MEB were evaluated with univariate analysis (Table 5). No statistically significant risk factors, including surgical revision and presence of perioperative complications, were identified.

Discussion

We confirmed that our cohort of young service members (mean age, 45.8 years), who had undergone TSA for glenohumeral arthritis, had a relatively higher rate of component failure (23.1%) and a higher reoperation rate (23.1%) with low rates of return to military duty at short-term to midterm follow-up. Our results parallel those of a limited series with a younger cohort (Table 6).^{7,16,19,21,23,24} The high demand and increased life expectancy of the younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis potentiates the risk of complications, component loosening, and ultimate failure.²⁹ To our knowledge, the present article is the first to report clinical and functional outcomes and perioperative risk profiles in a homogenously young, active military cohort after TSA.

The mean age of our study population (46 years) is one of the lowest in the literature. TSA in younger patients (age, <50-55 years) and older, active patients (>55 years) has received increased attention as a result of the expanding indications and growing popularity of TSA in these groups. Other studies have upheld the efficacy of TSA in achieving predictable pain relief and functional improvement in a diverse and predominantly elderly population.^15,30-34 Alternative treatments, including humeral head resurfacing^15,30,35 and soft-tissue interposition,^15,36-40 have also shown inferior short- and long-term results in terms of longevity and degree of clinical or functional improvement.^31-34,41 In addition, the ream-and-run technique has had promising early results by improving glenohumeral kinematics, pain relief, and shoulder function.^13,42,43 However, although implantation of a glenoid component is avoided in young, active people because of reduced longevity and higher rates of component failure, the trade-offs are inadequately treated glenoid disease, suboptimal pain relief, and progression of glenoid arthritis eventually requiring revision. Furthermore, midterm and long-term survivorship of TSA in general is unknown, and there remain few good options for treating end-stage arthritis in young, active patients.

Our cohort had high rates of complications (46.2%) and revisions (23.1%). Two in 5 patients had postoperative complications, most commonly component failure resulting in reoperation. In the literature, complication rates among young patients who underwent TSA are much lower (4.8%-10.9%).^16,23,24 Our cohort’s most common complication was component failure (23.1%), which was most often attributed to atraumatic, aseptic glenoid component loosening and required reoperation. Previously reported revision rates in a young population that underwent TSA (0%-11%)^16,23,24 were also significantly lower than those in the present analysis (23.1%), underscoring the impact of operative indications, postoperative activity levels, and occupational demands on ultimate failure rates. Interestingly, all revisions in our study were for component failure, whereas previous reports have described a higher rate for infection.²² However, the same studies also found glenoid lucency rates as high as 76% at 10-year follow-up.¹⁶ Furthermore, in a review of 136 TSAs with unsatisfactory outcomes, glenoid loosening was the most common reason for presenting to clinic after surgery.⁴⁴ Specifically, our population had a high rate of glenohumeral arthritis secondary to instability (50.0%) and posttraumatic osteoarthritis (26.9%). For many reasons, outcomes were worse in younger patients with a history of glenohumeral instability³³ than in older patients without a high incidence of instability.⁴⁵ This young cohort with higher demands may have had accelerated polyethylene wear patterns caused by repetitive overhead activity, which may have arisen because of a higher functional profile after surgery and greater patient expectations after arthroplasty. In addition, patients with a history of instability may have altered glenohumeral anatomy, especially with previous arthroscopic or open stabilization procedures. Anatomical changes include excessive posterior glenoid wear, internal rotation contracture, patulous capsular tissue, static or dynamic posterior humeral subluxation, and possible overconstraint after prior stabilization procedures. Almost half of our population had a previous surgery; our patients averaged 1.7 previous surgeries each.

Although estimates of component survivorship at a high-volume civilian tertiary-referral center were as high as 97% at 10 years and 84% at 20 years,^7,16 10-year survivorship in patients with a history of instability was only 61%.3 TSA survivorship in our young, active cohort is already foreseeably dramatically reduced, given the 23.1% revision rate at 28.5-month follow-up. This consideration must be addressed during preoperative counseling with the young patient with glenohumeral arthritis and a history of shoulder instability.

Despite the high rates of complications and revisions in our study, 92.3% of patients were satisfied with surgery, 88.0% experienced minimal persistence of pain (mean 3.8-point decrease on SRPS), and 100% maintained improved ROM at final follow-up. Satisfaction in the young population has varied significantly, from 52% to 95%, generally on the basis of physical activity.^16,22-24 The reasonable rate of postoperative satisfaction in the present analysis is comparable to what has been reported in patients of a similar age (Table 6).^7,16,22 However, despite high satisfaction and pain relief, patients were inconsistently able to return to the upper limits of physical activity required of active-duty military service. In addition, we cannot exclude secondary gain motivations for pursuing medical retirement, similar to that seen in patients receiving worker’s compensation.

Other authors have conversely found more favorable functional outcomes and survivorship rates.^23,24 In a retrospective review of 46 TSAs in patients 55 years or younger, Bartelt and colleagues²⁴ found sustained improvements in pain, ROM, and satisfaction at 7-year follow-up.24 Raiss and colleagues²³ conducted a prospective study of TSA outcomes in 21 patients with a mean age of 55 years and a mean follow-up of 7 years and reported no revisions and only 1 minor complication, a transient brachial plexus palsy.²³ The discrepancy between these studies may reflect different activity levels and underlying pathology between cohorts. The present population is unique in that it represents a particularly difficult confluence of factors for shoulder arthroplasty surgeons. The high activity, significant overhead and lifting occupational demands, and discordant patient expectations of this military cohort place a significant functional burden on the implants, the glenoid component in particular. Furthermore, this patient group has a higher incidence of more complex glenohumeral pathology resulting in instability, posttraumatic, or capsulorrhaphy arthropathy, and multiple prior arthroscopic and open stabilization procedures.

At final follow-up, only 33% of our patients were still on activity duty, 37.5% had completed or were completing medical separation from the military after surgery for persistent shoulder disability, and 37.5% were retired from the military. Five patients (20.8%) deployed after surgery. This young, active cohort of service members who had TSA for glenohumeral arthritis faced a unique set of tremendous physical demands. A retrospective case series investigated return to sport in 100 consecutive patients (mean age, 68.9 years) who were participating in recreational and competitive athletics and underwent unilateral TSA.²¹ The patients were engaged most commonly in swimming (20.4%), golf (16.3%), cycling (16.3%), and fitness training (16.3%). The authors found that, at a mean follow-up of 2.8 years, 49 patients (89%) were able to continue in sports, though 36.7% thought their sport activity was restricted after TSA. In another retrospective case series (61 TSAs), McCarty and colleagues¹⁹ found that 48 patients (71%) were improved in their sports participation, and 50% increased their frequency of participation after surgery.

There are no specific recommendations on returning to military service or high-level sport after surgery. Recommendations on returning to sport after TSA have been based largely on small case series involving specific sports^46,47 and surveys of expert opinion.^17,18 In a survey on postoperative physical activity in young patients after TSA conducted by Healy and colleagues,¹⁷ 35 American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons members recommended avoiding contact and impact sports while permitting return to nonimpact sports, such as swimming, which may still impart significant stress to the glenohumeral joint. In an international survey of 101 shoulder and elbow surgeons, Magnussen and colleagues¹⁸ also found that most recommended avoiding a return to impact sports that require intensive upper extremity demands and permitting full return to sports at preoperative levels. This likely is a result of the perception that most of these patients having TSA are older and have less rigorous involvement in sports at the outset and a lower propensity for adverse patient outcomes. However, these recommendations may place a younger, more high-demand patient at significantly greater risk. The active-duty cohort engages in daily physical training, including push-ups and frequent overhead lifting, which could account for the high failure rates and low incidence of postoperative deployment. Although TSA seems to demonstrate good initial results in terms of return to high-demand activities, the return-to-duty profile in our study highlights the potential pitfalls of TSA in active individuals attempting to return to high-demand preoperative function.

Our analysis was limited by the fact that we used a small patient cohort, contributing to underpowered analysis of the potential risk factors predictive of reoperation and medical discharge. Although our minimum follow-up was 12 months, with the exception of 1 patient who was medically separated at 11.6 months because of shoulder disability, we captured 5 patients (19.2%) who underwent medical separation but who would otherwise be excluded. Therefore, this limitation is not major in that, with a longer minimum follow-up, we would be excluding a significant number of patients with such persistent disability after TSA that they would not be able to return to duty at anywhere near their previous level. In this retrospective study, we were additionally limited to analysis of the data in the medical records and could not control for variables such as surgeon technique, implant choice, and experience. Complete radiographic images were not available, limiting analysis of radiographic outcomes. Given the lack of a standardized preoperative imaging protocol, we could not evaluate glenoid version on axial imaging. It is possible that some patients with early aseptic glenoid loosening had posterior subluxation or a Walch B2 glenoid, which has a higher failure rate.⁴⁸ The strengths of this study include its unique analysis of a homogeneous young, active, high-risk patient cohort within a closed healthcare system. In the military, these patients are subject to intense daily physical and occupational demands. In addition, the clinical and functional outcomes we studied are patient-centered and therefore relevant during preoperative counseling. Further investigations might focus on validated outcome measures and on midterm to long-term TSA outcomes in an active military population vis-à-vis other alternatives for clinical management.

Conclusion

By a mean follow-up of 3.5 years, only a third of the service members had returned to active duty, roughly a third had retired, and more than a third had been medically discharged because of persistent disability attributable to the shoulder. Despite initial improvements in ROM and pain, midterm outcomes were poor. The short-term complication rate (46.2%) and the rate of reoperation for component failure (23.1%) should be emphasized during preoperative counseling.

The humeral avulsion of glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) lesion has been recognized as a cause of recurrent shoulder instability. In 1942, Nicola¹ was the first to describe this lesion, in a small case series of avulsions of the anterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligament from the humeral neck secondary to a dislocation injury. In 1988, Bach and colleagues² described it in 2 patients with recurrent anterior dislocations. Wolf and colleagues³ were the first to apply the term HAGL to the injury, in 1995.

HAGL lesion incidence ranges from 1% to 9%, but many authors think the lesion is underdiagnosed.^3-5 It occurs in isolation or in combination with other injuries, and it is commonly identified on recurrence of instability. Bui-Mansfield and colleagues⁶ found that 11% of patients with a diagnosis of HAGL lesion previously had surgery on the same shoulder, whereas for 62% the lesion was associated with other, concurrent lesions, including labral tears (18, 25%), rotator cuff tears (16, 23%), and Hill-Sachs deformities (12, 17%).

Most young athletes who undergo nonoperative therapy for a HAGL lesion continue to experience pain and/or instability that then requires surgical intervention.⁴ To our knowledge, there are no reports of return to full function in young competitive athletes or return to manual labor after nonoperative management of a HAGL lesion.

In this article, we report the case of a US Navy SEAL who sustained a traction injury causing an axillary nerve injury and a HAGL lesion. Successful nonoperative management allowed him to return to full duty. The patient provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

An otherwise healthy 26-year-old Navy SEAL presented with pain and significant weakness in the right (dominant) upper extremity after an injury in a training exercise. The shoulder sustained a traction injury when the man’s fast-moving marine attack craft was in a collision and he was trying not to be thrown off. He reported having a sense of dislocation yet never required a reduction.

Physical examination revealed severe weakness with shoulder abduction, external rotation, and forward flexion; inability to contract the deltoid muscle; and complete numbness along the cutaneous distribution of the axillary nerve. On neurovascular examination, the right upper extremity was otherwise intact. The patient had complete passive range of motion (ROM) with apprehension in abduction with external rotation along with anterior laxity and normal posterior stability.

Standard shoulder radiographs showed no bony abnormalities and a concentrically reduced glenohumeral joint. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), reviewed by a staff musculoskeletal radiologist and a sports fellowship–trained orthopedic surgeon, showed a greater tuberosity contusion, a partial tear of the infraspinatus, and a HAGL lesion (Figure 1).

The patient was counseled toward surgical intervention to prevent symptoms of recurrent instability. A detailed discussion ensued about whether to proceed with surgery immediately or to pursue temporary nonoperative treatment to allow for assessment and return of deltoid function. Patient and surgeon decided to delay operative intervention because of concerns about the patient’s ability to effectively rehabilitate while still having a compromised axillary nerve after surgery. The recommendation was to delay initial electromyographic (EMG) and nerve conduction velocity testing at least 4 weeks to allow for completion of Wallerian degeneration and more accurate assessment of the axillary nerve.⁷ Physical therapy for gentle ROM (excluding external rotation) and isometric rotator cuff exercises were initiated.

Five weeks after injury, the patient left the area to attend a 2-month nonphysical training course and continued rehabilitation and orthopedic follow-up at another military medical facility. Six weeks after injury, initial EMG testing revealed the expected axillary neuropraxia. In addition, some marginal improvement in ROM was noted, but deltoid function was still very limited.

Ten weeks after injury, clinical inspection revealed deltoid wasting. Active shoulder ROM was limited, and deltoid strength was 3/5, though the patient was able to perform a standard push-up without difficulty and showed no sign of laxity or apprehension on shoulder examination. Repeat EMG testing revealed axillary nerve denervation with no sign of regeneration. Twelve weeks after injury, MRA showed reorganization and partial healing of the HAGL lesion relative to the prior study (Figure 2).

On the patient’s return from training, 15 weeks after injury, he had improved active ROM and 4+/5 deltoid strength. Axillary nerve sensation was still decreased but markedly improved. Physical examination revealed no significant shoulder laxity or apprehension, and the patient denied feelings of instability. Activities were advanced to include an organized strengthening program.

Six months after injury, the patient was cleared to return to his unit with only mild physical restriction. Function continued to steadily improve. After 9 months, he was cleared for full, unrestricted duty. Although he still demonstrated slight asymmetric weakness in the right deltoid with continued muscular atrophy, examination findings were otherwise normal, and he was back to full activities without significant symptoms.

Eleven months after injury, MRI showed healing of the HAGL lesion (Figure 3). At 17 months, EMG testing revealed significant interval improvement in axillary motor unit potentials but still about a 50% decrement compared with the noninjured side. The patient denied any motor or sensory deficits and any instability events since his injury. He continued with full function as an active-duty Navy SEAL.

Discussion

Nonoperative management has been used for injuries to the inferior glenohumeral ligament complex when there is no humeral detachment but generally has been reserved for low-demand patients and patients who cannot tolerate surgical intervention.⁴ Detached lesions may initially be managed nonoperatively with physical therapy and rehabilitation, but the rate of recurrent instability after nonoperative management of a known HAGL lesion remains unknown.⁴ Most active young people are expected to have persistent pain and/or instability and require surgical intervention. Both arthroscopic and open methods have been used successfully.^3,8-15 Persistent instability is often the primary complaint leading to a diagnosis of a HAGL lesion.⁴ The patient in this case report neither demonstrated nor reported any instability event after his 6-month period of nonoperative management, despite his young age and elite physical requirements.

To our knowledge, there are no reports of successful nonoperative management of a known symptomatic HAGL lesion in a high-demand athlete. Although we do not routinely recommend nonoperative treatment for cases such as the one reported here, the decision to delay this Navy SEAL’s surgical management was made out of concern about potential complications of postoperative rehabilitation given the concurrent axillary nerve injury.

With anterior shoulder dislocations, multiple concomitant shoulder injuries, including a HAGL lesion, are not uncommon.^6,16 With HAGL lesions, associated rotator cuff injuries occur at a rate as high as 23%.⁶ Our patient had a concurrent partial rotator cuff tear but also an axillary nerve traction injury. To our knowledge, the literature has not described axillary nerve injury specifically in association with a HAGL lesion, though it is well documented and maintained as a possible concurrent injury with anterior shoulder instability events.¹⁷ Robinson and colleagues¹⁶ found a 5.8% incidence of a clinically apparent neurologic deficit after traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in 3633 dislocations, about 75% of which were isolated axillary nerve injuries. They also reported a 25.7% rate of rotator cuff tear or greater tuberosity fracture, either of which significantly increased the likelihood of a neurologic deficit in their study.

When nerve continuity remains, functional recovery occurs after 3 to 6 months, or within weeks in some cases.^18-20 Nerve injuries in continuity but with persistent, severe clinical deficits may require surgical exploration with subsequent neurolysis and/or repair.^19-21 Our patient showed gradual axillary nerve recovery from a clinical standpoint. By 6 months after injury, despite continued muscle atrophy and decreased axillary nerve sensation, he had returned to full duty as a Navy SEAL. By 17 months, atrophy was markedly improved, and strength and ROM had subjectively returned, despite there being significant conduction amplitude losses, up to 50% of the contralateral side, on EMG testing.

This case represents a scenario in which likely initial surgical management was precluded by a concomitant injury, and the patient had a serendipitous outcome. It is possible the axillary neuropraxia and subsequent temporary deltoid dysfunction provided a unique environment that was conducive to the healing of the HAGL lesion. With classic Bankart lesions, many surgeons prefer to use aggressive early surgical treatment in first-time dislocators, especially elite athletes, in an attempt to avoid recurrent instability.^22-26 However, some have suggested that initial immobilization after acute injury may lead to successful nonoperative management.²⁷ Perhaps our case report raises the question as to whether a prolonged period of initial immobilization can prove successful in management of a HAGL lesion. Prospective studies comparing early surgical and nonoperative treatment of these challenging lesions are warranted.

We have reported a case of successful nonoperative management of a HAGL lesion in an active-duty Navy SEAL with concomitant shoulder injuries. This case could suggest that a trial of initial nonoperative management should be considered for injuries that involve a HAGL lesion when there are concerns about the patient’s ability to complete functional rehabilitation because of the combined injuries of the shoulder.

The humeral avulsion of glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) lesion has been recognized as a cause of recurrent shoulder instability. In 1942, Nicola¹ was the first to describe this lesion, in a small case series of avulsions of the anterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligament from the humeral neck secondary to a dislocation injury. In 1988, Bach and colleagues² described it in 2 patients with recurrent anterior dislocations. Wolf and colleagues³ were the first to apply the term HAGL to the injury, in 1995.

HAGL lesion incidence ranges from 1% to 9%, but many authors think the lesion is underdiagnosed.^3-5 It occurs in isolation or in combination with other injuries, and it is commonly identified on recurrence of instability. Bui-Mansfield and colleagues⁶ found that 11% of patients with a diagnosis of HAGL lesion previously had surgery on the same shoulder, whereas for 62% the lesion was associated with other, concurrent lesions, including labral tears (18, 25%), rotator cuff tears (16, 23%), and Hill-Sachs deformities (12, 17%).

Most young athletes who undergo nonoperative therapy for a HAGL lesion continue to experience pain and/or instability that then requires surgical intervention.⁴ To our knowledge, there are no reports of return to full function in young competitive athletes or return to manual labor after nonoperative management of a HAGL lesion.

In this article, we report the case of a US Navy SEAL who sustained a traction injury causing an axillary nerve injury and a HAGL lesion. Successful nonoperative management allowed him to return to full duty. The patient provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

An otherwise healthy 26-year-old Navy SEAL presented with pain and significant weakness in the right (dominant) upper extremity after an injury in a training exercise. The shoulder sustained a traction injury when the man’s fast-moving marine attack craft was in a collision and he was trying not to be thrown off. He reported having a sense of dislocation yet never required a reduction.

Physical examination revealed severe weakness with shoulder abduction, external rotation, and forward flexion; inability to contract the deltoid muscle; and complete numbness along the cutaneous distribution of the axillary nerve. On neurovascular examination, the right upper extremity was otherwise intact. The patient had complete passive range of motion (ROM) with apprehension in abduction with external rotation along with anterior laxity and normal posterior stability.

Standard shoulder radiographs showed no bony abnormalities and a concentrically reduced glenohumeral joint. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), reviewed by a staff musculoskeletal radiologist and a sports fellowship–trained orthopedic surgeon, showed a greater tuberosity contusion, a partial tear of the infraspinatus, and a HAGL lesion (Figure 1).

The patient was counseled toward surgical intervention to prevent symptoms of recurrent instability. A detailed discussion ensued about whether to proceed with surgery immediately or to pursue temporary nonoperative treatment to allow for assessment and return of deltoid function. Patient and surgeon decided to delay operative intervention because of concerns about the patient’s ability to effectively rehabilitate while still having a compromised axillary nerve after surgery. The recommendation was to delay initial electromyographic (EMG) and nerve conduction velocity testing at least 4 weeks to allow for completion of Wallerian degeneration and more accurate assessment of the axillary nerve.⁷ Physical therapy for gentle ROM (excluding external rotation) and isometric rotator cuff exercises were initiated.

Five weeks after injury, the patient left the area to attend a 2-month nonphysical training course and continued rehabilitation and orthopedic follow-up at another military medical facility. Six weeks after injury, initial EMG testing revealed the expected axillary neuropraxia. In addition, some marginal improvement in ROM was noted, but deltoid function was still very limited.

Ten weeks after injury, clinical inspection revealed deltoid wasting. Active shoulder ROM was limited, and deltoid strength was 3/5, though the patient was able to perform a standard push-up without difficulty and showed no sign of laxity or apprehension on shoulder examination. Repeat EMG testing revealed axillary nerve denervation with no sign of regeneration. Twelve weeks after injury, MRA showed reorganization and partial healing of the HAGL lesion relative to the prior study (Figure 2).

On the patient’s return from training, 15 weeks after injury, he had improved active ROM and 4+/5 deltoid strength. Axillary nerve sensation was still decreased but markedly improved. Physical examination revealed no significant shoulder laxity or apprehension, and the patient denied feelings of instability. Activities were advanced to include an organized strengthening program.

Six months after injury, the patient was cleared to return to his unit with only mild physical restriction. Function continued to steadily improve. After 9 months, he was cleared for full, unrestricted duty. Although he still demonstrated slight asymmetric weakness in the right deltoid with continued muscular atrophy, examination findings were otherwise normal, and he was back to full activities without significant symptoms.

Eleven months after injury, MRI showed healing of the HAGL lesion (Figure 3). At 17 months, EMG testing revealed significant interval improvement in axillary motor unit potentials but still about a 50% decrement compared with the noninjured side. The patient denied any motor or sensory deficits and any instability events since his injury. He continued with full function as an active-duty Navy SEAL.

Discussion

Nonoperative management has been used for injuries to the inferior glenohumeral ligament complex when there is no humeral detachment but generally has been reserved for low-demand patients and patients who cannot tolerate surgical intervention.⁴ Detached lesions may initially be managed nonoperatively with physical therapy and rehabilitation, but the rate of recurrent instability after nonoperative management of a known HAGL lesion remains unknown.⁴ Most active young people are expected to have persistent pain and/or instability and require surgical intervention. Both arthroscopic and open methods have been used successfully.^3,8-15 Persistent instability is often the primary complaint leading to a diagnosis of a HAGL lesion.⁴ The patient in this case report neither demonstrated nor reported any instability event after his 6-month period of nonoperative management, despite his young age and elite physical requirements.

To our knowledge, there are no reports of successful nonoperative management of a known symptomatic HAGL lesion in a high-demand athlete. Although we do not routinely recommend nonoperative treatment for cases such as the one reported here, the decision to delay this Navy SEAL’s surgical management was made out of concern about potential complications of postoperative rehabilitation given the concurrent axillary nerve injury.

With anterior shoulder dislocations, multiple concomitant shoulder injuries, including a HAGL lesion, are not uncommon.^6,16 With HAGL lesions, associated rotator cuff injuries occur at a rate as high as 23%.⁶ Our patient had a concurrent partial rotator cuff tear but also an axillary nerve traction injury. To our knowledge, the literature has not described axillary nerve injury specifically in association with a HAGL lesion, though it is well documented and maintained as a possible concurrent injury with anterior shoulder instability events.¹⁷ Robinson and colleagues¹⁶ found a 5.8% incidence of a clinically apparent neurologic deficit after traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in 3633 dislocations, about 75% of which were isolated axillary nerve injuries. They also reported a 25.7% rate of rotator cuff tear or greater tuberosity fracture, either of which significantly increased the likelihood of a neurologic deficit in their study.

When nerve continuity remains, functional recovery occurs after 3 to 6 months, or within weeks in some cases.^18-20 Nerve injuries in continuity but with persistent, severe clinical deficits may require surgical exploration with subsequent neurolysis and/or repair.^19-21 Our patient showed gradual axillary nerve recovery from a clinical standpoint. By 6 months after injury, despite continued muscle atrophy and decreased axillary nerve sensation, he had returned to full duty as a Navy SEAL. By 17 months, atrophy was markedly improved, and strength and ROM had subjectively returned, despite there being significant conduction amplitude losses, up to 50% of the contralateral side, on EMG testing.

This case represents a scenario in which likely initial surgical management was precluded by a concomitant injury, and the patient had a serendipitous outcome. It is possible the axillary neuropraxia and subsequent temporary deltoid dysfunction provided a unique environment that was conducive to the healing of the HAGL lesion. With classic Bankart lesions, many surgeons prefer to use aggressive early surgical treatment in first-time dislocators, especially elite athletes, in an attempt to avoid recurrent instability.^22-26 However, some have suggested that initial immobilization after acute injury may lead to successful nonoperative management.²⁷ Perhaps our case report raises the question as to whether a prolonged period of initial immobilization can prove successful in management of a HAGL lesion. Prospective studies comparing early surgical and nonoperative treatment of these challenging lesions are warranted.

We have reported a case of successful nonoperative management of a HAGL lesion in an active-duty Navy SEAL with concomitant shoulder injuries. This case could suggest that a trial of initial nonoperative management should be considered for injuries that involve a HAGL lesion when there are concerns about the patient’s ability to complete functional rehabilitation because of the combined injuries of the shoulder.

The humeral avulsion of glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) lesion has been recognized as a cause of recurrent shoulder instability. In 1942, Nicola¹ was the first to describe this lesion, in a small case series of avulsions of the anterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligament from the humeral neck secondary to a dislocation injury. In 1988, Bach and colleagues² described it in 2 patients with recurrent anterior dislocations. Wolf and colleagues³ were the first to apply the term HAGL to the injury, in 1995.

HAGL lesion incidence ranges from 1% to 9%, but many authors think the lesion is underdiagnosed.^3-5 It occurs in isolation or in combination with other injuries, and it is commonly identified on recurrence of instability. Bui-Mansfield and colleagues⁶ found that 11% of patients with a diagnosis of HAGL lesion previously had surgery on the same shoulder, whereas for 62% the lesion was associated with other, concurrent lesions, including labral tears (18, 25%), rotator cuff tears (16, 23%), and Hill-Sachs deformities (12, 17%).

Most young athletes who undergo nonoperative therapy for a HAGL lesion continue to experience pain and/or instability that then requires surgical intervention.⁴ To our knowledge, there are no reports of return to full function in young competitive athletes or return to manual labor after nonoperative management of a HAGL lesion.

In this article, we report the case of a US Navy SEAL who sustained a traction injury causing an axillary nerve injury and a HAGL lesion. Successful nonoperative management allowed him to return to full duty. The patient provided written informed consent for print and electronic publication of this case report.

Case Report

An otherwise healthy 26-year-old Navy SEAL presented with pain and significant weakness in the right (dominant) upper extremity after an injury in a training exercise. The shoulder sustained a traction injury when the man’s fast-moving marine attack craft was in a collision and he was trying not to be thrown off. He reported having a sense of dislocation yet never required a reduction.

Physical examination revealed severe weakness with shoulder abduction, external rotation, and forward flexion; inability to contract the deltoid muscle; and complete numbness along the cutaneous distribution of the axillary nerve. On neurovascular examination, the right upper extremity was otherwise intact. The patient had complete passive range of motion (ROM) with apprehension in abduction with external rotation along with anterior laxity and normal posterior stability.

Standard shoulder radiographs showed no bony abnormalities and a concentrically reduced glenohumeral joint. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), reviewed by a staff musculoskeletal radiologist and a sports fellowship–trained orthopedic surgeon, showed a greater tuberosity contusion, a partial tear of the infraspinatus, and a HAGL lesion (Figure 1).

The patient was counseled toward surgical intervention to prevent symptoms of recurrent instability. A detailed discussion ensued about whether to proceed with surgery immediately or to pursue temporary nonoperative treatment to allow for assessment and return of deltoid function. Patient and surgeon decided to delay operative intervention because of concerns about the patient’s ability to effectively rehabilitate while still having a compromised axillary nerve after surgery. The recommendation was to delay initial electromyographic (EMG) and nerve conduction velocity testing at least 4 weeks to allow for completion of Wallerian degeneration and more accurate assessment of the axillary nerve.⁷ Physical therapy for gentle ROM (excluding external rotation) and isometric rotator cuff exercises were initiated.

Five weeks after injury, the patient left the area to attend a 2-month nonphysical training course and continued rehabilitation and orthopedic follow-up at another military medical facility. Six weeks after injury, initial EMG testing revealed the expected axillary neuropraxia. In addition, some marginal improvement in ROM was noted, but deltoid function was still very limited.

Ten weeks after injury, clinical inspection revealed deltoid wasting. Active shoulder ROM was limited, and deltoid strength was 3/5, though the patient was able to perform a standard push-up without difficulty and showed no sign of laxity or apprehension on shoulder examination. Repeat EMG testing revealed axillary nerve denervation with no sign of regeneration. Twelve weeks after injury, MRA showed reorganization and partial healing of the HAGL lesion relative to the prior study (Figure 2).

On the patient’s return from training, 15 weeks after injury, he had improved active ROM and 4+/5 deltoid strength. Axillary nerve sensation was still decreased but markedly improved. Physical examination revealed no significant shoulder laxity or apprehension, and the patient denied feelings of instability. Activities were advanced to include an organized strengthening program.

Six months after injury, the patient was cleared to return to his unit with only mild physical restriction. Function continued to steadily improve. After 9 months, he was cleared for full, unrestricted duty. Although he still demonstrated slight asymmetric weakness in the right deltoid with continued muscular atrophy, examination findings were otherwise normal, and he was back to full activities without significant symptoms.

Eleven months after injury, MRI showed healing of the HAGL lesion (Figure 3). At 17 months, EMG testing revealed significant interval improvement in axillary motor unit potentials but still about a 50% decrement compared with the noninjured side. The patient denied any motor or sensory deficits and any instability events since his injury. He continued with full function as an active-duty Navy SEAL.

Discussion

Nonoperative management has been used for injuries to the inferior glenohumeral ligament complex when there is no humeral detachment but generally has been reserved for low-demand patients and patients who cannot tolerate surgical intervention.⁴ Detached lesions may initially be managed nonoperatively with physical therapy and rehabilitation, but the rate of recurrent instability after nonoperative management of a known HAGL lesion remains unknown.⁴ Most active young people are expected to have persistent pain and/or instability and require surgical intervention. Both arthroscopic and open methods have been used successfully.^3,8-15 Persistent instability is often the primary complaint leading to a diagnosis of a HAGL lesion.⁴ The patient in this case report neither demonstrated nor reported any instability event after his 6-month period of nonoperative management, despite his young age and elite physical requirements.

To our knowledge, there are no reports of successful nonoperative management of a known symptomatic HAGL lesion in a high-demand athlete. Although we do not routinely recommend nonoperative treatment for cases such as the one reported here, the decision to delay this Navy SEAL’s surgical management was made out of concern about potential complications of postoperative rehabilitation given the concurrent axillary nerve injury.

With anterior shoulder dislocations, multiple concomitant shoulder injuries, including a HAGL lesion, are not uncommon.^6,16 With HAGL lesions, associated rotator cuff injuries occur at a rate as high as 23%.⁶ Our patient had a concurrent partial rotator cuff tear but also an axillary nerve traction injury. To our knowledge, the literature has not described axillary nerve injury specifically in association with a HAGL lesion, though it is well documented and maintained as a possible concurrent injury with anterior shoulder instability events.¹⁷ Robinson and colleagues¹⁶ found a 5.8% incidence of a clinically apparent neurologic deficit after traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in 3633 dislocations, about 75% of which were isolated axillary nerve injuries. They also reported a 25.7% rate of rotator cuff tear or greater tuberosity fracture, either of which significantly increased the likelihood of a neurologic deficit in their study.

When nerve continuity remains, functional recovery occurs after 3 to 6 months, or within weeks in some cases.^18-20 Nerve injuries in continuity but with persistent, severe clinical deficits may require surgical exploration with subsequent neurolysis and/or repair.^19-21 Our patient showed gradual axillary nerve recovery from a clinical standpoint. By 6 months after injury, despite continued muscle atrophy and decreased axillary nerve sensation, he had returned to full duty as a Navy SEAL. By 17 months, atrophy was markedly improved, and strength and ROM had subjectively returned, despite there being significant conduction amplitude losses, up to 50% of the contralateral side, on EMG testing.

This case represents a scenario in which likely initial surgical management was precluded by a concomitant injury, and the patient had a serendipitous outcome. It is possible the axillary neuropraxia and subsequent temporary deltoid dysfunction provided a unique environment that was conducive to the healing of the HAGL lesion. With classic Bankart lesions, many surgeons prefer to use aggressive early surgical treatment in first-time dislocators, especially elite athletes, in an attempt to avoid recurrent instability.^22-26 However, some have suggested that initial immobilization after acute injury may lead to successful nonoperative management.²⁷ Perhaps our case report raises the question as to whether a prolonged period of initial immobilization can prove successful in management of a HAGL lesion. Prospective studies comparing early surgical and nonoperative treatment of these challenging lesions are warranted.

We have reported a case of successful nonoperative management of a HAGL lesion in an active-duty Navy SEAL with concomitant shoulder injuries. This case could suggest that a trial of initial nonoperative management should be considered for injuries that involve a HAGL lesion when there are concerns about the patient’s ability to complete functional rehabilitation because of the combined injuries of the shoulder.

New data from Consumer Reports indicate that 48% of all sunscreens tested (N=104) over 4 years did not provide the sun protection factor (SPF) promised on product labels, leaving consumers with insufficient sun protection, which could lead to long-term sun damage including wrinkles or skin cancer. Furthermore, 42% of chemical sunscreens (n=85) and 74% of mineral sunscreens (n=19) did not meet their SPF claims.

The study also reveals that more than one-third (35%) of sunscreens registered below SPF 30, which is the minimum recommended by the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD). Although product labels featured claims of water resistance, nearly half of the sunscreens tested failed to meet their SPF claim following water immersion.

Dermatologists can educate patients about correct sunscreen use and product labels to ensure the highest level of protection against melanoma and other skin cancers. According to a 2016 AAD survey, only 32% of respondents knew that an SPF 30 sunscreen does not provide twice as much protection as an SPF 15 sunscreen. Furthermore, only 45% of respondents knew that a higher-SPF sunscreen does not protect skin from sun exposure longer than a lower-SPF sunscreen.

The AAD has issued a list of talking points highlighting key messages that dermatologists can share with patients and/or the media when asked about sun-protection techniques and the recent sunscreen data released by Consumer Reports.

New data from Consumer Reports indicate that 48% of all sunscreens tested (N=104) over 4 years did not provide the sun protection factor (SPF) promised on product labels, leaving consumers with insufficient sun protection, which could lead to long-term sun damage including wrinkles or skin cancer. Furthermore, 42% of chemical sunscreens (n=85) and 74% of mineral sunscreens (n=19) did not meet their SPF claims.

The study also reveals that more than one-third (35%) of sunscreens registered below SPF 30, which is the minimum recommended by the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD). Although product labels featured claims of water resistance, nearly half of the sunscreens tested failed to meet their SPF claim following water immersion.

Dermatologists can educate patients about correct sunscreen use and product labels to ensure the highest level of protection against melanoma and other skin cancers. According to a 2016 AAD survey, only 32% of respondents knew that an SPF 30 sunscreen does not provide twice as much protection as an SPF 15 sunscreen. Furthermore, only 45% of respondents knew that a higher-SPF sunscreen does not protect skin from sun exposure longer than a lower-SPF sunscreen.

The AAD has issued a list of talking points highlighting key messages that dermatologists can share with patients and/or the media when asked about sun-protection techniques and the recent sunscreen data released by Consumer Reports.

New data from Consumer Reports indicate that 48% of all sunscreens tested (N=104) over 4 years did not provide the sun protection factor (SPF) promised on product labels, leaving consumers with insufficient sun protection, which could lead to long-term sun damage including wrinkles or skin cancer. Furthermore, 42% of chemical sunscreens (n=85) and 74% of mineral sunscreens (n=19) did not meet their SPF claims.

The study also reveals that more than one-third (35%) of sunscreens registered below SPF 30, which is the minimum recommended by the American Academy of Dermatology (AAD). Although product labels featured claims of water resistance, nearly half of the sunscreens tested failed to meet their SPF claim following water immersion.

Dermatologists can educate patients about correct sunscreen use and product labels to ensure the highest level of protection against melanoma and other skin cancers. According to a 2016 AAD survey, only 32% of respondents knew that an SPF 30 sunscreen does not provide twice as much protection as an SPF 15 sunscreen. Furthermore, only 45% of respondents knew that a higher-SPF sunscreen does not protect skin from sun exposure longer than a lower-SPF sunscreen.

The AAD has issued a list of talking points highlighting key messages that dermatologists can share with patients and/or the media when asked about sun-protection techniques and the recent sunscreen data released by Consumer Reports.

Customer satisfaction ratings of sunscreens do not always reflect the products’ effectiveness, as 40% of the 65 top-rated sunscreens available on Amazon.com did not adhere to all three of the American Academy of Dermatology’s recommended criteria.

The AAD recommends the following for all sunscreens: sun protection factor (SPF) of 30 more, broad-spectrum protection, and water and/or sweat resistance. Of those criteria, water/sweat resistance was missing in 19 (29%), compared with SPF less than 30 in 7 (11%) products and lack of broad-spectrum protection in 4 (6%). Some products missed more than one criterion, said Shuai Xu, MD, of Northwestern University, Chicago, and his associates (JAMA Dermatolol. 2016 Jul 6. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.2344).

Of the qualities besides performance that were analyzed, “cosmetic elegance,” which the investigators “defined as any feature associated with skin sensation on application, color, or scent,” was the positive feature most often mentioned in the customer reviews. On the other hand, they noted, “dermatologist recommendations were not a significantly cited positive feature.”

The sunscreens in the analysis represented the top 1 percentile by customer rating of the 6,500 products categorized as sunscreens on Amazon as of December 2015. The 65 products included in the study had more than 24,400 customer reviews and a median rating of 4.5 out of 5 stars, Dr. Xu and his associates said.

The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

Customer satisfaction ratings of sunscreens do not always reflect the products’ effectiveness, as 40% of the 65 top-rated sunscreens available on Amazon.com did not adhere to all three of the American Academy of Dermatology’s recommended criteria.

The AAD recommends the following for all sunscreens: sun protection factor (SPF) of 30 more, broad-spectrum protection, and water and/or sweat resistance. Of those criteria, water/sweat resistance was missing in 19 (29%), compared with SPF less than 30 in 7 (11%) products and lack of broad-spectrum protection in 4 (6%). Some products missed more than one criterion, said Shuai Xu, MD, of Northwestern University, Chicago, and his associates (JAMA Dermatolol. 2016 Jul 6. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.2344).

Of the qualities besides performance that were analyzed, “cosmetic elegance,” which the investigators “defined as any feature associated with skin sensation on application, color, or scent,” was the positive feature most often mentioned in the customer reviews. On the other hand, they noted, “dermatologist recommendations were not a significantly cited positive feature.”

The sunscreens in the analysis represented the top 1 percentile by customer rating of the 6,500 products categorized as sunscreens on Amazon as of December 2015. The 65 products included in the study had more than 24,400 customer reviews and a median rating of 4.5 out of 5 stars, Dr. Xu and his associates said.

The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

Customer satisfaction ratings of sunscreens do not always reflect the products’ effectiveness, as 40% of the 65 top-rated sunscreens available on Amazon.com did not adhere to all three of the American Academy of Dermatology’s recommended criteria.

The AAD recommends the following for all sunscreens: sun protection factor (SPF) of 30 more, broad-spectrum protection, and water and/or sweat resistance. Of those criteria, water/sweat resistance was missing in 19 (29%), compared with SPF less than 30 in 7 (11%) products and lack of broad-spectrum protection in 4 (6%). Some products missed more than one criterion, said Shuai Xu, MD, of Northwestern University, Chicago, and his associates (JAMA Dermatolol. 2016 Jul 6. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.2344).

Of the qualities besides performance that were analyzed, “cosmetic elegance,” which the investigators “defined as any feature associated with skin sensation on application, color, or scent,” was the positive feature most often mentioned in the customer reviews. On the other hand, they noted, “dermatologist recommendations were not a significantly cited positive feature.”

The sunscreens in the analysis represented the top 1 percentile by customer rating of the 6,500 products categorized as sunscreens on Amazon as of December 2015. The 65 products included in the study had more than 24,400 customer reviews and a median rating of 4.5 out of 5 stars, Dr. Xu and his associates said.

The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

There is apparently confusion about incident to billing of Medicare when employing nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Letters have been published in Dermatology News and other venues that confuse what is straightforward (JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150[11]:1153-9). I will, in my usual blunt fashion, explain incident to billing in dermatology.

First, private insurers may have different standards, but for Medicare, the most succinct government explanation is the introduction of the Office of Inspector General’s audit of incident to billing in the office. More recently, the rules have changed just a little, requiring the incident to biller to bill under the original supervising physician’s billing number, instead of whichever doctor is in the house. When a licensed extender bills under the supervising physician’s NPI number, the extender gets paid at 100% of the Medicare rates. If billing independently, the extender earns only 85%, so it behooves the employing dermatologist to make sure they are billing incident to, whenever possible.

The following examples should cover 95% of dermatologic encounters.

Example No. 1

A new patient is seen by the extender and supervising physician and is diagnosed with a chronic condition such as acne, warts, rosacea, psoriasis, eczema, or benign moles. A care plan is arrived at by the supervising physician, and the treatment is initiated by the extender. This and all subsequent visits can be billed at 100% under the physician’s billing number as long as the problems remain the same and there is a supervising physician in the building. Note that the supervising physician does not have to see the patient on the subsequent visits for the extender to continue to bill incident to. The extender can also bill under the original physician’s number at 100% if there is another physician in the house; the extender doesn’t have to change who they bill under depending on who is available (unless that physician sees the patient). The extender can change medications and change treatments as long as the original problems remain the same.

If the patient develops a new problem – say a growth that may need biopsy – the supervising physician must see the patient in order to bill at 100%. If the patient is not seen by the supervising physician, the extender must bill under their own number and collect only 85%.

Example No. 2

Let’s say a new patient comes in with extensive actinic damage, and is seen by the supervising physician, multiple skin lesions are identified, then the extender freezes multiple actinic keratoses (AKs), and does multiple skin biopsies. These can all be billed under the supervising physician’s number and paid at 100%.

When the same patient returns 6 months later with new AKs and suspicious growths, and the supervising physician does not see the patient, or is not in the house, the extender freezes AKs and does skin biopsies per their best judgment. These procedures must be billed under the extender’s NPI number because they are new problems.

Thus, you can see that for the great majority of diseases that dermatologists treat, you should be collecting the full amount from Medicare, for use of your extenders.

Either physicians are giving away a lot of income (not correctly billing incident to) or there are a lot of unsupervised extenders identifying suspicious lesions and performing surgery without formal training and direct supervision.

What makes me anxious is when I see in the Medicare database that the percentage of skin biopsies billed independently by extenders has increased from 0% to 14% over 10 years (2004-2014). I believe these lesions are being selected for biopsy by the extenders, and the supervising physician never sees them, and these are being billed correctly. This supports my concern about dermatologists setting up extenders in satellite biopsy clinics.

I get even more anxious when I see text from video outreach efforts from the president of the dermatology physician assistants society , stating, “I have my own patient schedule, my own medical assistant, my own rooms, I see new patients, I do my own surgeries, and see my own return patients,” apparently having become a dermatologist by shadowing and working for one.

I believe this is magical thinking. Either the many years of medical school and residency dermatologists went through were unnecessary (possible, but unlikely) or the extenders are overextended. Patients may never know they have not seen a dermatologist after scheduling an appointment with a dermatology group. At least one study has shown that unsupervised extenders may take up to twice as many skin biopsies to make a malignant diagnosis. This suggests that patients are being operated on unnecessarily and costs are being added to the health care system.

In addition, the Medicare data show that the number of skin biopsies has risen 34% over the past 10 years, while the number of skin cancer procedures has increased only 14%. No, these skin biopsies are not being done by extenders working for primary care doctors. Primary care docs perform only 3% of skin biopsies.

Perhaps these extenders are supervised, and their dermatologist employers just don’t want the possibility of a Medicare audit. Let me see: Dermatologists, the most accurate of all coding specialties, are willing to give up 15% of their income because they are confused by these simple rules? What do you think?

Dr. Coldiron is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. He is currently in private practice, but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics.

There is apparently confusion about incident to billing of Medicare when employing nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Letters have been published in Dermatology News and other venues that confuse what is straightforward (JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150[11]:1153-9). I will, in my usual blunt fashion, explain incident to billing in dermatology.

First, private insurers may have different standards, but for Medicare, the most succinct government explanation is the introduction of the Office of Inspector General’s audit of incident to billing in the office. More recently, the rules have changed just a little, requiring the incident to biller to bill under the original supervising physician’s billing number, instead of whichever doctor is in the house. When a licensed extender bills under the supervising physician’s NPI number, the extender gets paid at 100% of the Medicare rates. If billing independently, the extender earns only 85%, so it behooves the employing dermatologist to make sure they are billing incident to, whenever possible.

The following examples should cover 95% of dermatologic encounters.

Example No. 1

A new patient is seen by the extender and supervising physician and is diagnosed with a chronic condition such as acne, warts, rosacea, psoriasis, eczema, or benign moles. A care plan is arrived at by the supervising physician, and the treatment is initiated by the extender. This and all subsequent visits can be billed at 100% under the physician’s billing number as long as the problems remain the same and there is a supervising physician in the building. Note that the supervising physician does not have to see the patient on the subsequent visits for the extender to continue to bill incident to. The extender can also bill under the original physician’s number at 100% if there is another physician in the house; the extender doesn’t have to change who they bill under depending on who is available (unless that physician sees the patient). The extender can change medications and change treatments as long as the original problems remain the same.

If the patient develops a new problem – say a growth that may need biopsy – the supervising physician must see the patient in order to bill at 100%. If the patient is not seen by the supervising physician, the extender must bill under their own number and collect only 85%.

Example No. 2

Let’s say a new patient comes in with extensive actinic damage, and is seen by the supervising physician, multiple skin lesions are identified, then the extender freezes multiple actinic keratoses (AKs), and does multiple skin biopsies. These can all be billed under the supervising physician’s number and paid at 100%.

When the same patient returns 6 months later with new AKs and suspicious growths, and the supervising physician does not see the patient, or is not in the house, the extender freezes AKs and does skin biopsies per their best judgment. These procedures must be billed under the extender’s NPI number because they are new problems.

Thus, you can see that for the great majority of diseases that dermatologists treat, you should be collecting the full amount from Medicare, for use of your extenders.

Either physicians are giving away a lot of income (not correctly billing incident to) or there are a lot of unsupervised extenders identifying suspicious lesions and performing surgery without formal training and direct supervision.

What makes me anxious is when I see in the Medicare database that the percentage of skin biopsies billed independently by extenders has increased from 0% to 14% over 10 years (2004-2014). I believe these lesions are being selected for biopsy by the extenders, and the supervising physician never sees them, and these are being billed correctly. This supports my concern about dermatologists setting up extenders in satellite biopsy clinics.

I get even more anxious when I see text from video outreach efforts from the president of the dermatology physician assistants society , stating, “I have my own patient schedule, my own medical assistant, my own rooms, I see new patients, I do my own surgeries, and see my own return patients,” apparently having become a dermatologist by shadowing and working for one.

I believe this is magical thinking. Either the many years of medical school and residency dermatologists went through were unnecessary (possible, but unlikely) or the extenders are overextended. Patients may never know they have not seen a dermatologist after scheduling an appointment with a dermatology group. At least one study has shown that unsupervised extenders may take up to twice as many skin biopsies to make a malignant diagnosis. This suggests that patients are being operated on unnecessarily and costs are being added to the health care system.

In addition, the Medicare data show that the number of skin biopsies has risen 34% over the past 10 years, while the number of skin cancer procedures has increased only 14%. No, these skin biopsies are not being done by extenders working for primary care doctors. Primary care docs perform only 3% of skin biopsies.

Perhaps these extenders are supervised, and their dermatologist employers just don’t want the possibility of a Medicare audit. Let me see: Dermatologists, the most accurate of all coding specialties, are willing to give up 15% of their income because they are confused by these simple rules? What do you think?

Dr. Coldiron is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. He is currently in private practice, but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics.

There is apparently confusion about incident to billing of Medicare when employing nurse practitioners and physician assistants. Letters have been published in Dermatology News and other venues that confuse what is straightforward (JAMA Dermatol. 2014;150[11]:1153-9). I will, in my usual blunt fashion, explain incident to billing in dermatology.

First, private insurers may have different standards, but for Medicare, the most succinct government explanation is the introduction of the Office of Inspector General’s audit of incident to billing in the office. More recently, the rules have changed just a little, requiring the incident to biller to bill under the original supervising physician’s billing number, instead of whichever doctor is in the house. When a licensed extender bills under the supervising physician’s NPI number, the extender gets paid at 100% of the Medicare rates. If billing independently, the extender earns only 85%, so it behooves the employing dermatologist to make sure they are billing incident to, whenever possible.

The following examples should cover 95% of dermatologic encounters.

Example No. 1

A new patient is seen by the extender and supervising physician and is diagnosed with a chronic condition such as acne, warts, rosacea, psoriasis, eczema, or benign moles. A care plan is arrived at by the supervising physician, and the treatment is initiated by the extender. This and all subsequent visits can be billed at 100% under the physician’s billing number as long as the problems remain the same and there is a supervising physician in the building. Note that the supervising physician does not have to see the patient on the subsequent visits for the extender to continue to bill incident to. The extender can also bill under the original physician’s number at 100% if there is another physician in the house; the extender doesn’t have to change who they bill under depending on who is available (unless that physician sees the patient). The extender can change medications and change treatments as long as the original problems remain the same.

If the patient develops a new problem – say a growth that may need biopsy – the supervising physician must see the patient in order to bill at 100%. If the patient is not seen by the supervising physician, the extender must bill under their own number and collect only 85%.

Example No. 2

Let’s say a new patient comes in with extensive actinic damage, and is seen by the supervising physician, multiple skin lesions are identified, then the extender freezes multiple actinic keratoses (AKs), and does multiple skin biopsies. These can all be billed under the supervising physician’s number and paid at 100%.

When the same patient returns 6 months later with new AKs and suspicious growths, and the supervising physician does not see the patient, or is not in the house, the extender freezes AKs and does skin biopsies per their best judgment. These procedures must be billed under the extender’s NPI number because they are new problems.

Thus, you can see that for the great majority of diseases that dermatologists treat, you should be collecting the full amount from Medicare, for use of your extenders.

Either physicians are giving away a lot of income (not correctly billing incident to) or there are a lot of unsupervised extenders identifying suspicious lesions and performing surgery without formal training and direct supervision.

What makes me anxious is when I see in the Medicare database that the percentage of skin biopsies billed independently by extenders has increased from 0% to 14% over 10 years (2004-2014). I believe these lesions are being selected for biopsy by the extenders, and the supervising physician never sees them, and these are being billed correctly. This supports my concern about dermatologists setting up extenders in satellite biopsy clinics.

I get even more anxious when I see text from video outreach efforts from the president of the dermatology physician assistants society , stating, “I have my own patient schedule, my own medical assistant, my own rooms, I see new patients, I do my own surgeries, and see my own return patients,” apparently having become a dermatologist by shadowing and working for one.

I believe this is magical thinking. Either the many years of medical school and residency dermatologists went through were unnecessary (possible, but unlikely) or the extenders are overextended. Patients may never know they have not seen a dermatologist after scheduling an appointment with a dermatology group. At least one study has shown that unsupervised extenders may take up to twice as many skin biopsies to make a malignant diagnosis. This suggests that patients are being operated on unnecessarily and costs are being added to the health care system.

In addition, the Medicare data show that the number of skin biopsies has risen 34% over the past 10 years, while the number of skin cancer procedures has increased only 14%. No, these skin biopsies are not being done by extenders working for primary care doctors. Primary care docs perform only 3% of skin biopsies.

Perhaps these extenders are supervised, and their dermatologist employers just don’t want the possibility of a Medicare audit. Let me see: Dermatologists, the most accurate of all coding specialties, are willing to give up 15% of their income because they are confused by these simple rules? What do you think?

Dr. Coldiron is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. He is currently in private practice, but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics.

Transfusing sex-mismatched red blood cells (RBCs) was associated with an increased risk of death in people undergoing heart bypass surgery or aortic valve replacement, based on results of a retrospective single-center study of almost 10,000 transfusions in cardiac surgery patients.

Each unit of sex-mismatched red blood cells (RBCs) transfused was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.083; 95% confidence interval, 1.028-1.140; P = .003). In addition, transfusing 1-2 units of non–leukocyte depleted RBCs was associated with a significant increase in the risk of death during the first year after surgery (HR, 1.426; 95% CI, 1.004-2.024; P = .047).

Transfusion of 1-2 units of leukocyte-depleted RBCs and the age of blood products was not associated with increased mortality (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;152:223-32.e1).

“Factors such as ABO group, Rh profile and sex of the PRBC [packed RBC] donor generally have been overlooked, as has the variation in postdonation treatment of blood,” in the outcomes of cardiac surgery patients, researchers led by Henrik Bjursten, MD, PhD, of Lund (Sweden) University, reported.

The study involved 9,907 patients at Lund University from 2002 to 2012: 7,696 had coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG); 1,216 had aortic valve replacement (AVR); and 995 concomitantly had both procedures. PRBC transfusions were given to nearly 51% of the patients. Compared with the group that did not receive PRBC transfusions, the transfused group had significantly higher rates of heart attack after surgery (1.5% vs. 0.6%), infection (0.6% vs. 0.3%), reoperation for bleeding (4.3% vs. 0.2%), 30-day death (0.7% vs. 0.2%), and overall death (25.9% vs. 12.6%).

Based on an analysis that factored in 24 different variables, transfusion of 1-2 units of non–leukocyte depleted PRBCs was associated with a HR of 1.426, but the same amount of leukocyte-depleted PRBCs did not increase risk (HR, 0.981). However, transfusion of 5-7 units of leukocyte-depleted RBCs was associated with decreased survival, as was transfusion of sex-mismatched PRBCs, associated with a HR of 1.046-1.133 per unit, Dr. Bjursten and colleagues wrote. “In this cohort, 58% of transfusions were sex mismatched, and thus we interpret the result as relatively robust and clinically relevant.”

Patients having combined CABG and AVR were more likely to have PRBC transfusions than patients who had a single procedure. Additionally, the increased death rate in the PRBC transfusion group may have been related to age and comorbidities such as diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cardiac insufficiency. “Blood transfusion in part is a biomarker for advanced disease,” Dr. Bjursten and coauthors said. While patient who received PRBC transfusions may have been sicker, they did not require greater use of the ICU than patients who did not receive transfusions.

Dr. Bjursten disclosed receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific. Coauthor Lars Algotsson, MD, PhD, disclosed receiving lecture fees from Abbott. All other authors had no financial disclosures.

Transfusing sex-mismatched red blood cells (RBCs) was associated with an increased risk of death in people undergoing heart bypass surgery or aortic valve replacement, based on results of a retrospective single-center study of almost 10,000 transfusions in cardiac surgery patients.

Each unit of sex-mismatched red blood cells (RBCs) transfused was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.083; 95% confidence interval, 1.028-1.140; P = .003). In addition, transfusing 1-2 units of non–leukocyte depleted RBCs was associated with a significant increase in the risk of death during the first year after surgery (HR, 1.426; 95% CI, 1.004-2.024; P = .047).

Transfusion of 1-2 units of leukocyte-depleted RBCs and the age of blood products was not associated with increased mortality (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;152:223-32.e1).

“Factors such as ABO group, Rh profile and sex of the PRBC [packed RBC] donor generally have been overlooked, as has the variation in postdonation treatment of blood,” in the outcomes of cardiac surgery patients, researchers led by Henrik Bjursten, MD, PhD, of Lund (Sweden) University, reported.

The study involved 9,907 patients at Lund University from 2002 to 2012: 7,696 had coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG); 1,216 had aortic valve replacement (AVR); and 995 concomitantly had both procedures. PRBC transfusions were given to nearly 51% of the patients. Compared with the group that did not receive PRBC transfusions, the transfused group had significantly higher rates of heart attack after surgery (1.5% vs. 0.6%), infection (0.6% vs. 0.3%), reoperation for bleeding (4.3% vs. 0.2%), 30-day death (0.7% vs. 0.2%), and overall death (25.9% vs. 12.6%).

Based on an analysis that factored in 24 different variables, transfusion of 1-2 units of non–leukocyte depleted PRBCs was associated with a HR of 1.426, but the same amount of leukocyte-depleted PRBCs did not increase risk (HR, 0.981). However, transfusion of 5-7 units of leukocyte-depleted RBCs was associated with decreased survival, as was transfusion of sex-mismatched PRBCs, associated with a HR of 1.046-1.133 per unit, Dr. Bjursten and colleagues wrote. “In this cohort, 58% of transfusions were sex mismatched, and thus we interpret the result as relatively robust and clinically relevant.”

Patients having combined CABG and AVR were more likely to have PRBC transfusions than patients who had a single procedure. Additionally, the increased death rate in the PRBC transfusion group may have been related to age and comorbidities such as diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cardiac insufficiency. “Blood transfusion in part is a biomarker for advanced disease,” Dr. Bjursten and coauthors said. While patient who received PRBC transfusions may have been sicker, they did not require greater use of the ICU than patients who did not receive transfusions.

Dr. Bjursten disclosed receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific. Coauthor Lars Algotsson, MD, PhD, disclosed receiving lecture fees from Abbott. All other authors had no financial disclosures.

Transfusing sex-mismatched red blood cells (RBCs) was associated with an increased risk of death in people undergoing heart bypass surgery or aortic valve replacement, based on results of a retrospective single-center study of almost 10,000 transfusions in cardiac surgery patients.

Each unit of sex-mismatched red blood cells (RBCs) transfused was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.083; 95% confidence interval, 1.028-1.140; P = .003). In addition, transfusing 1-2 units of non–leukocyte depleted RBCs was associated with a significant increase in the risk of death during the first year after surgery (HR, 1.426; 95% CI, 1.004-2.024; P = .047).

Transfusion of 1-2 units of leukocyte-depleted RBCs and the age of blood products was not associated with increased mortality (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2016;152:223-32.e1).

“Factors such as ABO group, Rh profile and sex of the PRBC [packed RBC] donor generally have been overlooked, as has the variation in postdonation treatment of blood,” in the outcomes of cardiac surgery patients, researchers led by Henrik Bjursten, MD, PhD, of Lund (Sweden) University, reported.

The study involved 9,907 patients at Lund University from 2002 to 2012: 7,696 had coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG); 1,216 had aortic valve replacement (AVR); and 995 concomitantly had both procedures. PRBC transfusions were given to nearly 51% of the patients. Compared with the group that did not receive PRBC transfusions, the transfused group had significantly higher rates of heart attack after surgery (1.5% vs. 0.6%), infection (0.6% vs. 0.3%), reoperation for bleeding (4.3% vs. 0.2%), 30-day death (0.7% vs. 0.2%), and overall death (25.9% vs. 12.6%).

Based on an analysis that factored in 24 different variables, transfusion of 1-2 units of non–leukocyte depleted PRBCs was associated with a HR of 1.426, but the same amount of leukocyte-depleted PRBCs did not increase risk (HR, 0.981). However, transfusion of 5-7 units of leukocyte-depleted RBCs was associated with decreased survival, as was transfusion of sex-mismatched PRBCs, associated with a HR of 1.046-1.133 per unit, Dr. Bjursten and colleagues wrote. “In this cohort, 58% of transfusions were sex mismatched, and thus we interpret the result as relatively robust and clinically relevant.”

Patients having combined CABG and AVR were more likely to have PRBC transfusions than patients who had a single procedure. Additionally, the increased death rate in the PRBC transfusion group may have been related to age and comorbidities such as diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cardiac insufficiency. “Blood transfusion in part is a biomarker for advanced disease,” Dr. Bjursten and coauthors said. While patient who received PRBC transfusions may have been sicker, they did not require greater use of the ICU than patients who did not receive transfusions.

Dr. Bjursten disclosed receiving consulting fees from Boston Scientific. Coauthor Lars Algotsson, MD, PhD, disclosed receiving lecture fees from Abbott. All other authors had no financial disclosures.

As psychologists at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the Baylor College of Medicine, both in Houston, we agree with many points raised in a recent article about Dr. Harold Kudler’s presentation at the American Psychiatric Association meeting about the mental health care program at the Department of Veterans Affairs (See at left Related Content: “Greater focus on therapeutic relationship could improve VAMC outcomes”). However, we think the article inaccurately characterizes the role of the therapeutic relationship in evidence-based psychotherapy training and delivery within the VA.

The article states that evidence-based psychotherapy (EBP) training in the VA “typically focuses on mastering specific skills and maintaining adherence to the manuals rather than [emphasis added] on the strength and nature of the therapeutic relationship.” This is an unfortunate yet enduring myth. All of the 15 VA-sponsored EBP training programs specifically focus on the development of a strong working alliance as a necessary component of delivering these treatments. As a demonstration of this focus, the therapeutic alliance is measured as part of ongoing program evaluation efforts.

The VA EBP training programs that treat depression, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and chronic pain all have published results demonstrating that VA-licensed therapists in EBP training are able to build strong initial alliances with their veteran patients that continue to improve over the course of treatment (average Cohen’s d = 0.56) (J Consult Clin Psychol. 2012;80[5];707-18), (J Consult Clin Psychcol. 2014;82[6];1201-6), (Clin J Pain. 2015;31[8]722-9) (Behav Res Ther. 2013 Sep;51[9]555-63), (Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2015;30(3):308-15), and (Am Psychol. 2014 Jan;69[1]:19-33).

The article goes on to note that clinical practice guidelines should address therapist behaviors and qualities that promote a facilitative therapy relationship. As Dr. Kudler and his colleagues have noted elsewhere (JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 May 18. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.0746), the VA/Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder) explicitly states: “A supportive and collaborative treatment relationship or therapeutic alliance should be developed and maintained with patients with PTSD.” (http://www.healthquality.va.gov/PTSD-Full-2010c.pdf: p. 92, accessed on May 30, 2016.)

Similarly, the VA/DOD CPG for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) states that the therapeutic alliance “is at least as important as the specific treatment approach selected.” (http://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/sud/VADoDSUDCPGRevised22216.pdf: p. 15.)

In short, VA EBP training has a strong emphasis on the development of the therapeutic alliance as a necessary condition for effective treatment and published results demonstrating the strength of those alliances as well as robust symptom reductions among our veteran patients. We agree with the authors as well as various task forces that the therapeutic relationship should be included in mental health CPGs beyond those mentioned for PTSD and SUD.

Tracey L. Smith, Ph.D.
Houston

Natalie Hundt, Ph.D.
Houston

As psychologists at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the Baylor College of Medicine, both in Houston, we agree with many points raised in a recent article about Dr. Harold Kudler’s presentation at the American Psychiatric Association meeting about the mental health care program at the Department of Veterans Affairs (See at left Related Content: “Greater focus on therapeutic relationship could improve VAMC outcomes”). However, we think the article inaccurately characterizes the role of the therapeutic relationship in evidence-based psychotherapy training and delivery within the VA.

The article states that evidence-based psychotherapy (EBP) training in the VA “typically focuses on mastering specific skills and maintaining adherence to the manuals rather than [emphasis added] on the strength and nature of the therapeutic relationship.” This is an unfortunate yet enduring myth. All of the 15 VA-sponsored EBP training programs specifically focus on the development of a strong working alliance as a necessary component of delivering these treatments. As a demonstration of this focus, the therapeutic alliance is measured as part of ongoing program evaluation efforts.

The VA EBP training programs that treat depression, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and chronic pain all have published results demonstrating that VA-licensed therapists in EBP training are able to build strong initial alliances with their veteran patients that continue to improve over the course of treatment (average Cohen’s d = 0.56) (J Consult Clin Psychol. 2012;80[5];707-18), (J Consult Clin Psychcol. 2014;82[6];1201-6), (Clin J Pain. 2015;31[8]722-9) (Behav Res Ther. 2013 Sep;51[9]555-63), (Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2015;30(3):308-15), and (Am Psychol. 2014 Jan;69[1]:19-33).

The article goes on to note that clinical practice guidelines should address therapist behaviors and qualities that promote a facilitative therapy relationship. As Dr. Kudler and his colleagues have noted elsewhere (JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 May 18. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.0746), the VA/Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder) explicitly states: “A supportive and collaborative treatment relationship or therapeutic alliance should be developed and maintained with patients with PTSD.” (http://www.healthquality.va.gov/PTSD-Full-2010c.pdf: p. 92, accessed on May 30, 2016.)

Similarly, the VA/DOD CPG for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) states that the therapeutic alliance “is at least as important as the specific treatment approach selected.” (http://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/sud/VADoDSUDCPGRevised22216.pdf: p. 15.)

In short, VA EBP training has a strong emphasis on the development of the therapeutic alliance as a necessary condition for effective treatment and published results demonstrating the strength of those alliances as well as robust symptom reductions among our veteran patients. We agree with the authors as well as various task forces that the therapeutic relationship should be included in mental health CPGs beyond those mentioned for PTSD and SUD.

Tracey L. Smith, Ph.D.
Houston

Natalie Hundt, Ph.D.
Houston

As psychologists at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the Baylor College of Medicine, both in Houston, we agree with many points raised in a recent article about Dr. Harold Kudler’s presentation at the American Psychiatric Association meeting about the mental health care program at the Department of Veterans Affairs (See at left Related Content: “Greater focus on therapeutic relationship could improve VAMC outcomes”). However, we think the article inaccurately characterizes the role of the therapeutic relationship in evidence-based psychotherapy training and delivery within the VA.

The article states that evidence-based psychotherapy (EBP) training in the VA “typically focuses on mastering specific skills and maintaining adherence to the manuals rather than [emphasis added] on the strength and nature of the therapeutic relationship.” This is an unfortunate yet enduring myth. All of the 15 VA-sponsored EBP training programs specifically focus on the development of a strong working alliance as a necessary component of delivering these treatments. As a demonstration of this focus, the therapeutic alliance is measured as part of ongoing program evaluation efforts.

The VA EBP training programs that treat depression, insomnia, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and chronic pain all have published results demonstrating that VA-licensed therapists in EBP training are able to build strong initial alliances with their veteran patients that continue to improve over the course of treatment (average Cohen’s d = 0.56) (J Consult Clin Psychol. 2012;80[5];707-18), (J Consult Clin Psychcol. 2014;82[6];1201-6), (Clin J Pain. 2015;31[8]722-9) (Behav Res Ther. 2013 Sep;51[9]555-63), (Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2015;30(3):308-15), and (Am Psychol. 2014 Jan;69[1]:19-33).

The article goes on to note that clinical practice guidelines should address therapist behaviors and qualities that promote a facilitative therapy relationship. As Dr. Kudler and his colleagues have noted elsewhere (JAMA Psychiatry. 2016 May 18. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.0746), the VA/Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder) explicitly states: “A supportive and collaborative treatment relationship or therapeutic alliance should be developed and maintained with patients with PTSD.” (http://www.healthquality.va.gov/PTSD-Full-2010c.pdf: p. 92, accessed on May 30, 2016.)

Similarly, the VA/DOD CPG for the Management of Substance Use Disorders (SUDs) states that the therapeutic alliance “is at least as important as the specific treatment approach selected.” (http://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/MH/sud/VADoDSUDCPGRevised22216.pdf: p. 15.)

In short, VA EBP training has a strong emphasis on the development of the therapeutic alliance as a necessary condition for effective treatment and published results demonstrating the strength of those alliances as well as robust symptom reductions among our veteran patients. We agree with the authors as well as various task forces that the therapeutic relationship should be included in mental health CPGs beyond those mentioned for PTSD and SUD.

Tracey L. Smith, Ph.D.
Houston

Natalie Hundt, Ph.D.
Houston

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Civil Rights has issued new guidance to help physicians and their practices combat a ransomware attack.

Ransomware – a type of malicious software designed to block access to a computer system until a sum of money is paid – is becoming a bigger problem for U.S. businesses in general. Daily ransomware attacks against all types of computer systems increased 300% in early 2016 to 4,000, from 1,000 daily attacks in 2015, according to the Department of Justice.

The HHS fact sheet offers information on how HIPAA compliance can help protect and recover infected systems; how to detect if systems are infected; and what to do if a system becomes infected, including what is reportable.

There are “measures known to be effective to prevent the introduction of ransomware and to recover from a ransomware attack,” according to HHS.

[email protected]

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Civil Rights has issued new guidance to help physicians and their practices combat a ransomware attack.

Ransomware – a type of malicious software designed to block access to a computer system until a sum of money is paid – is becoming a bigger problem for U.S. businesses in general. Daily ransomware attacks against all types of computer systems increased 300% in early 2016 to 4,000, from 1,000 daily attacks in 2015, according to the Department of Justice.

The HHS fact sheet offers information on how HIPAA compliance can help protect and recover infected systems; how to detect if systems are infected; and what to do if a system becomes infected, including what is reportable.

There are “measures known to be effective to prevent the introduction of ransomware and to recover from a ransomware attack,” according to HHS.

[email protected]

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Civil Rights has issued new guidance to help physicians and their practices combat a ransomware attack.

Ransomware – a type of malicious software designed to block access to a computer system until a sum of money is paid – is becoming a bigger problem for U.S. businesses in general. Daily ransomware attacks against all types of computer systems increased 300% in early 2016 to 4,000, from 1,000 daily attacks in 2015, according to the Department of Justice.

The HHS fact sheet offers information on how HIPAA compliance can help protect and recover infected systems; how to detect if systems are infected; and what to do if a system becomes infected, including what is reportable.

There are “measures known to be effective to prevent the introduction of ransomware and to recover from a ransomware attack,” according to HHS.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration has approved dexlansoprazole (Dexilant) for gastroesophageal reflux disease patients aged 12-17 years, according to a press release from Takeda Pharmaceuticals.

FDA approval of dexlansoprazole for this age group is based on adequate and well controlled studies proving its efficacy in adults, as well data on safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy in children 12-17 years. Dexlansoprazole is approved for younger patients to maintain healing of erosive esophagus and heartburn relief for 16 weeks, healing all grades of EE for 8 weeks, and treating heartburn associated with GERD for 4 weeks.

Ddexlansoprazole is a proton pump inhibitor, prescribed to relieve heartburn associated with GERD and maintain healed erosive esophagus. The most common side effects seen in individuals aged 12-17 were headache, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nasopharyngitis, and oropharyngeal pain.

“Takeda is pleased with the FDA’s approval to expand the access of Dexilant to younger patients with GERD. This new approval provides an alternative treatment option for appropriate patients with this condition. With our more than 20 years of experience in gastroenterology, we remain dedicated to all patients living with these conditions,” noted Thomas Gibbs, senior vice president of general medicine at Takeda.

Find the full press release on the Takeda Pharmaceuticals website.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved dexlansoprazole (Dexilant) for gastroesophageal reflux disease patients aged 12-17 years, according to a press release from Takeda Pharmaceuticals.

FDA approval of dexlansoprazole for this age group is based on adequate and well controlled studies proving its efficacy in adults, as well data on safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy in children 12-17 years. Dexlansoprazole is approved for younger patients to maintain healing of erosive esophagus and heartburn relief for 16 weeks, healing all grades of EE for 8 weeks, and treating heartburn associated with GERD for 4 weeks.

Ddexlansoprazole is a proton pump inhibitor, prescribed to relieve heartburn associated with GERD and maintain healed erosive esophagus. The most common side effects seen in individuals aged 12-17 were headache, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nasopharyngitis, and oropharyngeal pain.

“Takeda is pleased with the FDA’s approval to expand the access of Dexilant to younger patients with GERD. This new approval provides an alternative treatment option for appropriate patients with this condition. With our more than 20 years of experience in gastroenterology, we remain dedicated to all patients living with these conditions,” noted Thomas Gibbs, senior vice president of general medicine at Takeda.

Find the full press release on the Takeda Pharmaceuticals website.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved dexlansoprazole (Dexilant) for gastroesophageal reflux disease patients aged 12-17 years, according to a press release from Takeda Pharmaceuticals.

FDA approval of dexlansoprazole for this age group is based on adequate and well controlled studies proving its efficacy in adults, as well data on safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy in children 12-17 years. Dexlansoprazole is approved for younger patients to maintain healing of erosive esophagus and heartburn relief for 16 weeks, healing all grades of EE for 8 weeks, and treating heartburn associated with GERD for 4 weeks.

Ddexlansoprazole is a proton pump inhibitor, prescribed to relieve heartburn associated with GERD and maintain healed erosive esophagus. The most common side effects seen in individuals aged 12-17 were headache, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nasopharyngitis, and oropharyngeal pain.

“Takeda is pleased with the FDA’s approval to expand the access of Dexilant to younger patients with GERD. This new approval provides an alternative treatment option for appropriate patients with this condition. With our more than 20 years of experience in gastroenterology, we remain dedicated to all patients living with these conditions,” noted Thomas Gibbs, senior vice president of general medicine at Takeda.

Find the full press release on the Takeda Pharmaceuticals website.

With only a few weeks left until the 2016 Olympic Games get underway in Rio de Janeiro, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are urging anyone traveling to the Olympics to take precautions to avoid contracting Zika virus infection or spreading it when they return home.

But the CDC estimates that there is a low probability of mosquito-borne Zika virus infections during the Olympics because Rio will be experiencing cooler, drier weather then, which typically reduces the mosquito population.

©Rattikankeawpun/Thinkstock.com

Along with lower mosquito activity, the CDC said that the number of visitors expected in Brazil for the Olympics represents only a fraction of the total travel volume to Zika-affected countries during 2015. The Brazilian Tourism Board is expecting anywhere between 350,000 and 500,000 visitors for the Olympic Games, coming from 207 countries. That represents less than 0.25% of the total travel volume to Zika-affected countries during the entirety of 2015, according to the CDC.

There are 19 countries that the CDC deems susceptible to sustained mosquito-borne transmission of the Zika virus, should the virus enter the country via an attendee of the Olympics (MMWR. 2016 Jul 13. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6528e1).

Of these 19 – none of which are currently experiencing a Zika outbreak – 15 are “not estimated to increase substantially the level of risk above that incurred by the usual aviation travel baseline for these countries.” This leaves Chad, Djibouti, Eritrea, and Yemen at an elevated risk for a Zika outbreak. These four countries “are unique in that they do not have a substantial number of travelers to any country with local Zika virus transmission, except for anticipated travel to the Games,” according to the CDC.

The CDC is urging travelers to take protective measures for their entire stay in Rio and for at least 3 weeks after returning home. The measures include applying mosquito repellent, wearing long-sleeved shirts and long pants, staying in rooms that are air conditioned, and using either screen doors or a mosquito net for additional protection. Additionally, all travelers should take measures to prevent sexual transmission. The CDC continues to advise pregnant women not to travel to the Olympics.

[email protected]

With only a few weeks left until the 2016 Olympic Games get underway in Rio de Janeiro, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are urging anyone traveling to the Olympics to take precautions to avoid contracting Zika virus infection or spreading it when they return home.

But the CDC estimates that there is a low probability of mosquito-borne Zika virus infections during the Olympics because Rio will be experiencing cooler, drier weather then, which typically reduces the mosquito population.

©Rattikankeawpun/Thinkstock.com

Along with lower mosquito activity, the CDC said that the number of visitors expected in Brazil for the Olympics represents only a fraction of the total travel volume to Zika-affected countries during 2015. The Brazilian Tourism Board is expecting anywhere between 350,000 and 500,000 visitors for the Olympic Games, coming from 207 countries. That represents less than 0.25% of the total travel volume to Zika-affected countries during the entirety of 2015, according to the CDC.

There are 19 countries that the CDC deems susceptible to sustained mosquito-borne transmission of the Zika virus, should the virus enter the country via an attendee of the Olympics (MMWR. 2016 Jul 13. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6528e1).

Of these 19 – none of which are currently experiencing a Zika outbreak – 15 are “not estimated to increase substantially the level of risk above that incurred by the usual aviation travel baseline for these countries.” This leaves Chad, Djibouti, Eritrea, and Yemen at an elevated risk for a Zika outbreak. These four countries “are unique in that they do not have a substantial number of travelers to any country with local Zika virus transmission, except for anticipated travel to the Games,” according to the CDC.

The CDC is urging travelers to take protective measures for their entire stay in Rio and for at least 3 weeks after returning home. The measures include applying mosquito repellent, wearing long-sleeved shirts and long pants, staying in rooms that are air conditioned, and using either screen doors or a mosquito net for additional protection. Additionally, all travelers should take measures to prevent sexual transmission. The CDC continues to advise pregnant women not to travel to the Olympics.

[email protected]

With only a few weeks left until the 2016 Olympic Games get underway in Rio de Janeiro, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are urging anyone traveling to the Olympics to take precautions to avoid contracting Zika virus infection or spreading it when they return home.

But the CDC estimates that there is a low probability of mosquito-borne Zika virus infections during the Olympics because Rio will be experiencing cooler, drier weather then, which typically reduces the mosquito population.

©Rattikankeawpun/Thinkstock.com

Along with lower mosquito activity, the CDC said that the number of visitors expected in Brazil for the Olympics represents only a fraction of the total travel volume to Zika-affected countries during 2015. The Brazilian Tourism Board is expecting anywhere between 350,000 and 500,000 visitors for the Olympic Games, coming from 207 countries. That represents less than 0.25% of the total travel volume to Zika-affected countries during the entirety of 2015, according to the CDC.

There are 19 countries that the CDC deems susceptible to sustained mosquito-borne transmission of the Zika virus, should the virus enter the country via an attendee of the Olympics (MMWR. 2016 Jul 13. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6528e1).

Of these 19 – none of which are currently experiencing a Zika outbreak – 15 are “not estimated to increase substantially the level of risk above that incurred by the usual aviation travel baseline for these countries.” This leaves Chad, Djibouti, Eritrea, and Yemen at an elevated risk for a Zika outbreak. These four countries “are unique in that they do not have a substantial number of travelers to any country with local Zika virus transmission, except for anticipated travel to the Games,” according to the CDC.

The CDC is urging travelers to take protective measures for their entire stay in Rio and for at least 3 weeks after returning home. The measures include applying mosquito repellent, wearing long-sleeved shirts and long pants, staying in rooms that are air conditioned, and using either screen doors or a mosquito net for additional protection. Additionally, all travelers should take measures to prevent sexual transmission. The CDC continues to advise pregnant women not to travel to the Olympics.

[email protected]