Uninvited Manuscripts are not Unwanted: The Value of Unsolicited Investigations

We are pleased to announce that our second issue of 2025 will consist entirely of non-invited original investigations. As our readers know, we usually publish review articles highlighting sports medicine and arthroscopy. As Dr Dil Cannon, Editor-in-Chief Emeritus, stated in his inaugural editorial for Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review, “We perceive a need for a new review journal that assembles key articles under one cover and provides an in-depth analysis of one important current topic.”1 Traditionally, we have published only invited review manuscripts on topics of current interest. Dr Cannon’s insight remains relevant today, but we have a substantial backlog of unsolicited scientific manuscripts that deserve publication. The excellence of our published review articles has inspired authors to submit uninvited manuscripts for review. Precise wording to communicate the meaning of “uninvited” can be challenging, particularly for a journal with an international audience. As we started receiving original investigations and manuscripts, our default label was “uninvited.” This term doesn’t accurately describe these remarkable manuscripts. We want to be clear: uninvited or unsolicited investigations are not unwanted. Unsolicited manuscripts bring value to our journal and our readers. We have accepted those that meet the rigorous standards of our robust peer review and are written for a sports medicine and arthroscopy audience. Our readers and our improving Impact Factor strongly support our journal model for review articles! In this issue, we feature: “Effect Analysis of Early Rehabilitation Therapy Combined With Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation on Postoperative Rehabilitation of Sports Knee Injury” by S. Feng, X. Shi, X. Cao, and J. Zhao. They found that post-meniscectomy patients in the treatment group had significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes and reduction of knee swelling. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is a noninvasive brain stimulation therapy that uses a magnetic coil against the scalp to deliver repeated pulses of magnetic fields, which may act to decrease pain.2 “Ultrasound-Guided Genicular Nerve Block in Patients Undergoing Knee Arthroscopy: A Randomized Controlled Trial” by Q. Liu, Q. Zhong, G. Tang, P. Yang, and L. Ye. This study evaluated the genicular nerve block after knee surgery. The 35 patients in the treatment group had significantly less resting pain up to 24 hours after surgery and less pain with activity up to 12 hours compared with the control group.3 “Rotator Cuff Tear and Associated Risk Factors: The Mutual Role of Medical Conditions” by J. Standoli, V. Candela, and S. Gumina. This review examined medical conditions linked to rotator cuff tears. The authors used a multivariable prognostic model and found that patients who smoked cigarettes and those with hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, and arterial hypertension were more likely to develop rotator cuff pathology, compared with patients without these conditions.4 “Meniscus Centralization and its Effects on Meniscal Extrusion and Knee Biomechanics: A Systematic Review” by K. Makiev, I. Vasios, A. Keskinis, A. Ververidis, K. Tilkeridis, and E. Iliopoulos.5 The authors concluded that “…meniscal centralization could effectively reduce meniscal extrusion and enhance knee biomechanics, implying that both an improvement in clinical outcomes and a positive impact on knee osteoarthritis are possible.”5 “The Utilization of Static and Dynamic Models for the Biomechanical Testing of Rotator Cuff Pathology: A Systematic Review” by D. Berthold, B. Ford, M. Shuman, L. Muench, B. Hawthorne, E. Obopilwe, A. Mazzocca, T. Lee, B. Elhassan, and I. Wellington. Shoulder simulators can produce both static and dynamic shoulder motion models for superior capsular repair and rotator cuff tears. Static models are highly reproducible and can be compared between investigations, whereas dynamic shoulder models aim to replicate more physiological and clinically applicable shoulder motion. The authors found that static models are more frequently tested.6 To restate and be clear: Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review will publish both invited review articles, as we always have, and unsolicited original investigations. We hope that you find both types of investigations valuable for you and your patients.