OBJECTIVE: To compare the therapeutic approach of surgical specialists, sports medicine and rehabilitation specialists, and veterinarians with rehabilitation certification when treating bicipital tendon disease or tenosynovitis in dogs and to combine this information with existing research to develop a treatment algorithm that provides a framework for treating bicipital tenosynovitis.
METHODS: 223 respondents to an internet survey of board-certified veterinary surgeons, board-certified sports medicine and rehabilitation therapists, and veterinarians with rehabilitation certification.
METHODS: The survey was promoted via multiple listservs, specialist college newsletters, and private relevant social media sites. Answers were compiled and submitted for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Compared to rehabilitation therapists (RTh), surgeons placed less value on the stabilizing function of the biceps tendon and its role in preventing other shoulder morbidities. Similarly, compared to RTh, surgeons were more inclined to select surgery as the primary therapeutic approach and attributed a less optimistic prognosis to conservative therapy outcomes. There were multiple differences between surgeons and RTh in executing a conservative therapy program, with RTh more likely to recommend therapeutic exercise, extracorporeal shockwave, regenerative medicine, therapeutic ultrasound, exercise restriction, photobiomodulation, and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy. RTh were less likely to prescribe NSAIDS or inject corticosteroids. Despite the above noted differences, there were also multiple areas of agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: Consensus agreement, combined with existing research, was used to create a treatment algorithm suggesting how to best address multiple manifestations of bicipital tendinopathy. Such guidelines can be considered to direct therapeutic strategies for this common condition.

BACKGROUND: Although image-guided interventional procedures of the elbow and wrist are routinely performed, there is poor evidence in the literature concerning such treatments. Our aim was to perform a Delphi-based consensus on published evidence on image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist and provide clinical indications on this topic.
METHODS: A board of 45 experts in image-guided interventional musculoskeletal procedures from the European Society of Musculoskeletal Radiology were involved in this Delphi-based consensus study. All panelists reviewed and scored published papers on image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist updated to September 2018 according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine levels of evidence. Consensus on statements drafted by the panelists about clinical indications was considered as \"strong\" when more than 95% of panelists agreed and as \"broad\" if more than 80% agreed.
RESULTS: Eighteen statements were drafted, 12 about tendon procedures and 6 about intra-articular procedures. Only statement #15 reached the highest level of evidence (ultrasound-guided steroid wrist injections result in greater pain reduction and greater likelihood of attaining clinically important improvement). Seventeen statements received strong consensus (94%), while one received broad consensus (6%).
CONCLUSIONS: There is still poor evidence in published papers on image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist. A strong consensus has been achieved in 17/18 (94%) statements provided by the panel on clinical indications. Large prospective randomized trials are needed to better define the role of these procedures in clinical practice.
CONCLUSIONS: • The panel provided 18 evidence-based statements on clinical indications of image-guided interventional procedures around the elbow and wrist. • Only statement #15 reached the highest level of evidence: ultrasound-guided steroid wrist injections result in greater pain reduction and greater likelihood of attaining clinically important improvement. • Seventeen statements received strong consensus (94%), while broad consensus was obtained by 1 statement (6%).

The goal of this article is to consolidate the International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine (ISAKOS) Upper Extremity Committee\'s (UEC\'s) current knowledge on rotator cuff disease and management, as well as highlight key unresolved issues. The rotator cuff is an anatomically complex structure important for providing glenohumeral function and stability as part of a closed chain system. Current consensus suggests rotator cuff injuries are most accurately diagnosed, at levels similar to diagnosis by magnetic resonance imaging, with a combination of cuff- and impingement-specific clinical tests. Updates in the understanding of acromion morphology, the insertional anatomy of the rotator cuff, and the role of suprascapular nerve release may require changes to current classification systems and surgical strategies. Although initial management focuses on nonoperative protocols, discussion continues on whether surgery for isolated impingement is clinically more beneficial than rehabilitation. However, clear indications have yet to be established for the use of single- versus double-row repair because evidence confirms neither is clinically efficacious than the other. Biceps tenodesis, however, in non-isolated cuff tears has proven more successful in addressing the etiology of shoulder pain and yields improved outcomes over tenotomy. Data reviewing the benefits of tendon transfers, shoulder prostheses, and mechanical scaffolds, as well as new research on the potential benefit of platelet-rich plasma, pluripotential stem cells, and gene therapies, will also be presented.