Live from the Arthrex Team Physician Controversies Conference

In this episode of The Sports Docs Podcast, Dr. Ashley Bassett and Dr. Catherine Logan sit down LIVE from the Arthrex Team Physician Controversies with two leading ACL experts—Dr. Pat Smith and Dr. Aaron Krych—to discuss strategies to reduce failure after ACL reconstruction.

The conversation highlights the evolution of ACL surgery, focusing on graft selection, fixation, biologic augmentation, and mechanical protection, with an emphasis on optimizing outcomes in young, high-risk athletes.

Graft: Autograft vs Allograft

Strong evidence shows higher failure rates with allograft in young athletes
MOON data: ~4–6x increased risk of failure in patients <25 years

Allograft best for:

• Older, lower-demand patients
• Revision or multi-ligament cases

Autograft Selection

Graft choice depends on:

• Age, sex, sport, and anatomy

BTB:

• Preferred for high-level pivoting athletes
• Strong fixation, less graft elongation

Quadriceps tendon:

• Increasingly utilized
• Larger graft diameter
• Less donor-site morbidity vs BTB
• Particularly useful in younger and female athletes

Key insight:
Grafts <8 mm are associated with higher failure risk

Internal Brace (IB)

Indications:

• Young athletes
• Hyperlax patients
• Revision ACL

Benefits:

• Decreased graft elongation and cyclic displacement
• Reduced postoperative laxity
• Lower rerupture rates (~1% at 5 years in some studies)
• Faster return to sport and improved rehab confidence

Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis (LET)

Strong evidence supports reduced failure rates:

• Primary ACLR: ~11% → 4% (high-risk patients)
• Revision ACLR: ~21% → 5%

Benefits:

• Decreased pivot shift
• Improved return to pre-injury sport
• Cost-effective in high-risk populations

Indications for LET

• Age ≤25 years
• High-grade pivot shift
• Knee hyperextension
• Return to cutting/pivoting sports
• Revision ACL reconstruction

LET Surgical Technique Pearls

IT band graft (7–8 cm x 1 cm)
Passed under or near LCL depending on technique
Fixation near lateral epicondyle

Pearls:

• Fix in neutral rotation and ~30–60° flexion
• Avoid overconstraint
• Close IT band defect

Featured Guests

Dr. Pat Smith – Hospital for Special Surgery Naples

Dr. Aaron Krych – Mayo Clinic, Team Physician for the Minnesota Timberwolves

Stay Connected

Apple Podcasts

Spotify

YouTube

Follow us on Instagram for more insights on cutting-edge sports medicine, athlete recovery, and performance

https://www.instagram.com/thesportsdocspod/

Our Hosts:

Catherine Logan, MD, MBA

https://www.cloganmd.com/

Ashley Bassett, MD

https://orthopedicnj.com/physicians/ashley-bassett

www.thesportsdocspod.com

Live from the Arthrex Team Physician Controversies Conference

🎧 Episode Summary

In this episode of The Sports Docs Podcast, Dr. Ashley Bassett and Dr. Catherine Logan sit down LIVE from the Arthrex Team Physician Controversies with cartilage restoration expert Dr. Travis Maak to discuss the modern surgical management of knee cartilage defects.

The conversation focuses on diagnostic workup, surgical decision-making, and cutting-edge cartilage restoration techniques, including Autocart, BioCartilage, and Cartiform.

Diagnostic Imaging - MRI is critical for:

• Defect size and depth
• Subchondral bone integrity and edema
• Concomitant meniscal and ligament pathology

Surgical Decision-Making

• Patient age & activity level
• Lesion size, location, & containment
• Subchondral bone involvement
• Prior surgical history

Autocart (Autologous Minced Cartilage)

Single-stage autograft cartilage restoration technique
Uses patient’s own cartilage with PRP or BMAC
Key advantages:

• Preserves native chondrocytes & extracellular matrix
• Avoids staged procedures

Ideal for small-to-medium contained lesions

Outcomes:

• Significant improvements in pain & function at ~5 years
• ~75% achieve clinically meaningful outcomes
• Low reoperation rates

BioCartilage

Micronized cartilage extracellular matrix allograft scaffold
Used in combination with microfracture and biologics (PRP/BMAC)
Functions as a biologic bridge to enhance cartilage repair

Best for:

• Small-to-medium, contained, full-thickness defects
• Well-aligned, stable knees

Outcomes:

• Improved pain and function at 2 years
• Better repair tissue quality compared to microfracture alone

Cartiform

Cryopreserved osteochondral allograft with viable chondrocytes
Maintains native cartilage architecture

Indicated for:

• Larger lesions (>2 cm²)
• Defects with subchondral bone involvement

Advantages:

• Single-stage procedure
• Conforms to irregular defects

Key Takeaways

• Cartilage restoration success depends on correcting biomechanics first
• Procedure selection should be lesion-specific and patient-specific
• Autocart offers a promising autograft solution with strong midterm data
• BioCartilage fills the gap between microfracture and larger restoration procedures
• Cartiform is a valuable option for larger defects and requires careful patient selection

Featured Guest

Dr. Travis Maak – University of Utah, Head Team Physician for the Utah Jazz, cartilage restoration and joint preservation specialist

🎤 Stay Connected

If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe, rate, and review on:
Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

Follow us on Instagram

Modern Surgical Management of Elbow UCL Tears

Live from the Arthrex Team Physician Controversies

🎧 Episode Summary

In this episode of The Sports Docs Podcast, Dr. Ashley Bassett and Dr. Catherine Logan sit down LIVE from the Arthrex Team Physician Controversies with two leaders in sports medicine—Dr. Neal ElAttrache and Dr. Jeffrey Dugas—to discuss the modern management of ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries in throwing athletes.

Highlights

Changing UCL Injury Landscape

• Increasing incidence of UCL injuries and surgeries across all levels of play
• Notable rise in adolescent and collegiate pitchers
• Contributing factors include year-round play and high pitch velocity

Nonoperative Management & Role of PRP

• Nonoperative treatment remains appropriate for select partial tears
• Success varies based on tear grade and location
• PRP discussed as an adjunct to rehab

Indications for Surgery

• Complete tears—especially in competitive throwers—often require surgical intervention
• Tear characteristics (location, tissue quality, chronicity) are critical in decision-making

UCL Repair with Internal Brace

• Increasingly utilized in appropriately selected patients
• Ideal candidates:
  • Acute injuries
  • Proximal or distal avulsion tears
  • Good tissue quality
• Advantages:
  • High return-to-play (~90%+)
  • Accelerated recovery timelines (often several months faster)

UCL Reconstruction (Tommy John Surgery)

• Remains the gold standard for:
  • Chronic degeneration
  • Midsubstance tears
  • Revision cases
• Techniques have evolved over time:
  • Docking technique
  • Figure-of-eight
  • Newer fixation methods (e.g., cortical button techniques)
• Autograft (commonly palmaris longus) remains preferred in elite throwers

Internal Brace Technology

• Provides added stability and resistance to valgus stress
• Supports early rehabilitation while protecting healing tissue
• Increasing use in both repair and, selectively, reconstruction

Key Takeaways

• UCL injuries are increasing, particularly in younger athletes
• Treatment decisions are increasingly personalized based on tear type and athlete profile
• UCL repair with Internal Brace is shifting the paradigm for select patients
• Reconstruction remains essential for more complex or chronic injuries

Featured Guests

• Dr. Neal ElAttrache – Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic, Head Team Physician for the LA Dodgers & LA Rams
• Dr. Jeffrey Dugas – Andrews Sports Medicine & Orthopaedic Center, leading expert in UCL repair and reconstruction

🎤 Stay Connected

If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe, rate, and review on:
Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

Follow us on Instagram

Live from the 10th Annual Arthrex Team Physician Controversies Conference

🎧 Episode Overview

In this episode of The Sports Docs Podcast, Dr. Ashley Bassett and Dr. Catherine Logan sit down LIVE from the Arthrex Team Physician Controversies Conference to explore how next-generation arthroscopic imaging is transforming the way orthopaedic surgeons diagnose and treat injuries.

Joined by Dr. James Voos—Chairman of Orthopedics at University Hospitals and Head Team Physician for the Cleveland Browns—the conversation dives into the evolution of nano arthroscopy, panoramic visualization, and integrated imaging systems, and what these advancements mean for surgeons, athletes, and patient outcomes.

What You’ll Learn

1. The Evolution of Nano Arthroscopy

• From the original Arthrex NanoScope (2019) to NanoNeedle 2.0
• Major leap in image resolution (400×400 → 720×720, near 4K)
• Less invasive approach and improved patient experience

2. Seeing What Imaging Can Miss

• How in-office diagnostic arthroscopy is reducing reliance on equivocal MRI findings
• Identifying subtle pathology:
  • Partial-thickness rotator cuff tears
  • Meniscal ramp lesions
  • Early chondral defects

3. The Power of Panoramic Visualization (Panoscope)

• Expanded field of view compared to traditional arthroscopy
• Seamless transition between 30°, 70°, and ultra-wide 45° views
• Reduced “blind spots” in complex anatomy

4. Workflow & Efficiency in the OR

• How the Synergy Vision System integrates NanoNeedle + Panoscope
• Dual-view capability for enhanced intraoperative decision-making
• Improved efficiency

5. Adoption & Learning Curve

• Designed to be intuitive for surgeons
• Importance of training and mentorship
• Technology enhances decision-making without adding complexity

Featured Guest

Dr. James Voos

• Chairman of Orthopedics, University Hospitals
• Medical Director, UH Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute
• Head Team Physician, Cleveland Browns

Stay Connected

If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe, rate, and review on:
Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Amazon Music | YouTube

Follow us on Instagram for more insights on cutting-edge sports medicine, athlete recovery, and performance.

Welcome to another episode of Ask The Sports Docs. We get a lot questions from our listeners each week and they’re great questions, so rather than responding individually we thought we’d do these mini episodes where highlight some of the best questions and our responses. So, let’s get started!

Today, we’re tackling the question: “Should I have surgery for my type III AC joint
separation?” If you are a sports medicine or shoulder surgeon, you’ve definitely had this conversation with your patients. And if you are an athlete, you’ve probably googled this after landing on your shoulder snowboarding, playing hockey, playing football etc. And the truth is – the answer isn’t black and white. But to try to answer that question, we’re going to review an article titled “Functional, Radiological, and Scapular Motion Evaluation of Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment of Type 3 Acromioclavicular Dislocations.”

This level 1 RCT aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of surgical and nonoperative treatment of type 3 AC separations.

So, let's dive in!

www.cloganmd.com / www.cosportsmedicine.com / https://orthopedicnj.com/physicians/ashley-bassett

Welcome to Overtime with the Sports Docs. On each of these mini episodes, we chat about a new article or new surgical technique in the field of sports medicine.

We’ll give you our quick take on the most recent data and how this data will impact our practice. Today, we’re chatting about recurrent patellar instability, and specifically the risk of progressive cartilage damage in the setting of repeat patella dislocation events. We’re going to review an article from the August 2024 issue of AJSM titled: “The Number of Patellar Dislocation Events Is Associated With Increased Chondral Damage of the Trochlea.”

This study uses data from the JUPITER cohort — which stands for: Justifying Patellar Instability Treatment by Early Results. The authors ask a clinically critical question: Does the number of dislocations matter when it comes to cartilage damage?

www.cloganmd.com / www.cosportsmedicine.com / https://orthopedicnj.com/physicians/ashley-bassett

Welcome to another episode of Ask The Sports Docs. We get a lot questions from our listeners each week and they’re great questions, so rather than responding individually we thought we’d do these mini episodes where highlight some of the best questions and our responses. So, let’s get started!

Today’s Ask The Sports Docs focuses on a question that we get asked a lot on the sideline, in locker rooms and by parents of our young contact sport athletes: Do you recommend the use of Guardian Caps to decrease the risk of concussion? If you have watched NFL training camp over the last few years, you’ve seen them – Those padded shells over the helmets. They’re everywhere now in preseason practices. But are they actually preventing concussions? Or are we just seeing a visible symbol of safety without meaningful impact?

That is what we are going to tackle today. And to do that, we’re going to review a recent article published in the August 2025 issue of AJSM titled “An Analysis of Guardian Cap Use and Changes in the Concussion Rate in NFL Preseason Practices From 2018 to 2023.”

Find us:

www.thesportsdocspod.com / www.cloganmd.com

https://orthopedicnj.com/physicians/ashley-bassett

Today, we’re diving into a paper that reviews the long-term outcomes following arthroscopic Bankart repair and challenges some of the historical narratives around this procedure.

The study that we are reviewing today is titled “Long-term Outcomes of a Contemporary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Technique in Patients With Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Minimum 10-Year Follow-up.”

This is a minimum 10-year follow-up study looking at modern arthroscopic Bankart techniques using at least three anchors — and it asks:

Are recurrence rates still as high as we’ve been taught?