Rehabilitation Following Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in Overhead-Throwing Athletes

Variable Return to Play and Sport Performance After Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in Baseball Players: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To evaluate return to play (RTP) and return to same level of play (RTSP) rates as well as preoperative and postoperative in-game performance metrics in baseball pitchers who underwent ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR). Secondarily, this review sought to assess outcomes based on primary versus revision UCLR as well as level of competition.

METHODS

This review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were queried to identify articles evaluating UCLR in baseball players between January 2002 and October 2022. Data included RTP, RTSP, and performance metrics including earned run average, innings pitched, walks and hits per inning pitched, batting average against, strikeouts per 9 innings, walks per 9 innings, percentage of fastballs thrown, and average fastball velocity. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies criteria were used for quality assessment.

RESULTS

Analysis included 25 articles reporting on 2,100 elbows. After primary UCLR, RTP ranged from 336 to 615 days (57% to 100% achieved) and RTSP ranged from 330 to 513 days (61% to 95%). After revision UCLR, RTP ranged from 381 to 631 days (67% to 98%) and RTSP ranged from 518 to 575 days (42% to 78%). When stratifying primary UCLR outcomes by competitive level, RTP and RTSP ranged respectively from 417 to 615 days (75% to 100%) and 513 days (73% to 87%) for Major League Baseball only, 409 to 615 days (57% to 100%) and 470 to 513 days (61% to 95%) for Major League Baseball plus Minor League Baseball, and 336 to 516 days (73% to 85%) and 330 days (55% to 74%) for college plus high school. Heterogeneity was seen in postoperative sports performance metrics.

CONCLUSIONS

Although more than half of baseball players appear able to RTP after primary and revision UCLR, RTSP rates after revision UCLR were as low as 42% in the literature. Preoperative and postoperative performance metrics varied.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Factors Important to Patient Decision-Making After Ulnar Collateral Ligament Injury in Competitive High School and Collegiate Baseball Players

Background

Patients are faced with several treatment decisions after an ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injury: nonoperative versus operative treatment, repair versus reconstruction, and immediate versus delayed surgery.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The aim of this study was to investigate the factors important to patients when deciding which treatment to pursue after a UCL injury. We hypothesized that (1) length of time away from sports and seasonal timing would be important to patients and (2) treatment decision-making would be heavily influenced by how many and which seasons of their baseball career would be missed.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

High school and collegiate baseball players with UCL tears treated at an academic institution were surveyed retrospectively on their sports participation at the time of injury and their UCL injury treatment decisions. Respondents rated the influence of various factors on a 5-point Likert scale, and they selected the top 3 factors and the single most important factor influencing their treatment decisions. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between player characteristics and factors important to their treatment decision.

Results

A total of 83 athletes completed the survey; 40 were in high school and 43 were in college at the time of injury; 7 were treated nonoperatively and 76 underwent surgery (66 immediately and 10 in a delayed fashion), 10 with UCL repair and 66 with UCL reconstruction. The ability to play competitive baseball in the long term was very important or extremely important to 90% of players, while the ability to play in the short term was very important or extremely important to 17%. Length of recovery and seasonal timing were also important factors for 53% and 54% of players, respectively, and almost all (90%) highly valued advice from a surgeon. Possible failure of nonoperative treatment leading to increased time away and the possible loss of 2 consecutive baseball seasons heavily influenced decision-making in 41% of respondents.

Conclusion

Survey respondents were driven by the desire to play baseball in the long term. Treatment decisions were influenced by the length of recovery and by the seasonal timing of their injury, both of which affect how many and which seasons of baseball a player may miss. Patients found advice from their surgeon to be extremely important to decision-making.

Biomechanical Analysis of the Throwing Athlete and Its Impact on Return to Sport

Throwing sports remain a popular pastime and frequent source of musculoskeletal injuries, particularly those involving the shoulder and elbow. Biomechanical analyses of throwing athletes have identified pathomechanic factors that predispose throwers to injury or poor performance. These factors, or key performance indicators, are an ongoing topic of research, with the goals of improved injury prediction, prevention, and rehabilitation. Important key performance indicators in the literature to date include shoulder and elbow torque, shoulder rotation, kinetic chain function (as measured by trunk rotation timing and hip-shoulder separation), and lower-extremity mechanics (including stride characteristics). The current gold standard for biomechanical analysis of the throwing athlete involves marker-based 3-dimensional) video motion capture. Emerging technologies such as marker-less motion capture, wearable technology, and machine learning have the potential to further refine our understanding. This review will discuss the biomechanics of throwing, with particular attention to baseball pitching, while also delineating methods of modern throwing analysis, implications for clinical orthopaedic practice, and future areas of research interest.

Level of Evidence

V, expert opinion.