RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lateral epicondylitis is a common cause of elbow pain that is generally self-limiting. For patients who have persistent symptoms refractory to conservative treatment, there is still no clear consensus on the most favorable treatment modality. The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the available literature regarding both nonoperative and operative treatment modalities for recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis (RLE) to provide insight into the efficacy of treatment options. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines, where the PubMed, MEDLINE/Ovid, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were queried to identify studies evaluating treatment options for RLE. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies with 1,958 patients were included. Of the reviewed studies, there were a wide variety of treatments including platelet-rich plasma injections, percutaneous tenotomies, and various arthroscopic and open procedures. CONCLUSION: There are a wide variety of treatment modalities available for RLE that have promising efficacy in the short, medium, and long terms. A comprehensive approach combining evidence-based and patient-centered care is critical for effective management of refractory symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Asunto(s)
Codo de Tenista , Codo de Tenista/terapia , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Humanos , Artroscopía , Tenotomía/métodos , Plasma Rico en Plaquetas , Tratamiento ConservadorRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the bibliometric characteristics of the top 50 cited articles in elbow arthroscopy. METHODS: The Web of Science Core Collection was employed to systematically retrieve publications related to elbow arthroscopy. Subsequently, the top 50 cited articles meeting the predefined inclusion criteria were meticulously documented and subjected to comprehensive bibliometric analysis. RESULTS: The top 50 cited articles spanned the years 1999-2017, with the 2010s emerging as the most prolific decade. Citations per article varied from 24 to 211, and citation density ranged from 1.61 to 9.17. The United States dominated in article production and citations. Predominantly, the articles took the form of case series and expert opinions, with a notable absence of level I or II evidence. The keywords with the highest frequencies were "arthrofibrosis," "complications," and "release." These keywords formed five main clusters: stiff elbow, osteoarthritis, osteochondritis dissecans, and lateral epicondylitis. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the top 50 cited articles in elbow arthroscopy comprised case series exhibiting Level IV or V evidence. Despite a dynamic development post-2010, elbow arthroscopy articles showed lower mean citations and citation density compared to other joints, potentially influenced by concerns about complications. However, with the increasing prevalence of elbow arthroscopy procedures, it is anticipated that higher-level articles, particularly those focusing on complications and exploring additional indications, will supersede some of the articles included in this analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Asunto(s)
Artroscopía , Bibliometría , Articulación del Codo , Humanos , Artroscopía/métodos , Artroscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , Osteocondritis Disecante/cirugía , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Osteoartritis/cirugíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Bibliometric analyses provide an aggregate of the most frequently cited literature in a given field. The purpose of this study was to analyze the top 100 most-cited classical and contemporary papers relating to elbow surgery to serve as a reference for surgeons and trainees for educational and research purposes. METHODS: A search was conducted for all papers containing the term "elbow" in the categories Orthopedics, Surgery, and Sports Science in the Clarivate Web of Science. Classical papers were those published from 1980 to 2009, and contemporary papers were those published from 2010 to 2019. Articles were assessed by country of origin, authors and their credentials, parent journal, level of evidence, and topic. RESULTS: Citation frequency ranged from 86 to 867. Among the classical group, there were more level IV papers compared with level I papers; however, the opposite was true in the contemporary group. The most common topic in the classical group was elbow anatomy and function, and the most common topic in the contemporary group was lateral epicondylitis and medial epicondylitis and associated therapies. DISCUSSION: This bibliometric analysis serves to help guide surgeons and trainees on the highly cited articles and important topics in elbow surgery, demonstrating a shift to prospective randomized controlled trials in recent years. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V (Systematic Review with Level V as Lowest LOE).
Asunto(s)
Bibliometría , Codo , Humanos , Codo/cirugía , Procedimientos Ortopédicos , Ortopedia/educación , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , Codo de Tenista/cirugíaRESUMEN
Elbow arthroscopy is an important surgical technique for the treatment of various elbow pathologies. Range of indications for elbow arthroscopy include, but are not limited to, diagnostic evaluation, removal of loose bodies, synovectomy, contracture releases, lateral epicondylitis treatment, and adjunct use for fracture reduction. Surgeons' understanding of anatomy and portal placement is critical for successful treatment. This article reviews the relevant surgical anatomy, portal placement, patient positioning, surgical indications, and complications for this technique.
Asunto(s)
Articulación del Codo , Cirujanos , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Artroscopía/métodos , Codo/cirugía , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , Codo de Tenista/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Different arthroscopic techniques exist for managing the extensor carpi radials brevis (ECRB) when treating refractory lateral epicondylitis. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of a standard arthroscopic débridement with ECRB tendon release to an arthroscopic ECRB tenotomy distal to its insertion without débridement using a retrospective cohort study design. METHODS: This study included patients underwent arthroscopic treatment of lateral epicondylitis during 2 different time periods: 2016-2019 (débridement) and 2019-2021 (modified tenotomy without débridement). Patients were assessed preoperatively and at the last follow-up with Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, Visual Analog Scale of pain. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients completed the follow-up (38 in the débridement group and 31 in the tenotomy group). Patients in both groups showed significant improvements were found in MEPS, DASH, and Visual Analog Scale after surgery. Patients in the tenotomy group had higher MEPSs and reported less pain with a minimum 2 year follow-up after surgery. DASH scores between groups were similar at all time periods. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic modified tenotomy of the ECRB without débridement improves function and pain significantly for patients with refractory lateral epicondylitis, which is not inferior to arthroscopic débridement technique.
Asunto(s)
Codo de Tenista , Tenotomía , Humanos , Tenotomía/métodos , Estudios de Cohortes , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Codo , Estudios Retrospectivos , Artroscopía/métodos , DolorRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Tennis elbow management has primarily been conservative over the years with over 90% of the cases being managed conservatively. Surgical intervention may be necessary only for symptomatic recalcitrant cases of tennis elbow cases. However, there are gaps in the literature when it comes to comparison of the return to pre-operative return to their work and level of activities among patients who undergo arthroscopic management and those who receive conservative management. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted to compare 23 patients receiving continued intensive conservative (CIC) management in group 1 with 24 patients undergoing arthroscopic release of the extensor carpi radialis brevis and lateral epicondyle decortication (ARD) in group 2. The study had a minimum follow-up period of 3.5 years. The researchers compared the groups in terms of return to work (RTW) at the same intensity or lower level and any changes in their previous work. Objective grip strength and patient-reported outcome measures, such as post-intervention satisfaction level (rated on a scale of 0-100) and visual analog scale (VAS) for residual elbow pain, were also compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Return to work (RTW) occurred significantly earlier in group 2 (mean 6.13 months) compared to group 1 (mean 4.64 months), and a greater number of patients in group 2 (13/24, 54.2%) were able to return to the same of work. Although not statistically significant, the ARD group exhibited comparable patient satisfaction (p = 0.62) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores for residual elbow pain (p = 0.67). Grip strength was comparable (p = 0.084, 0.121) between the affected and unaffected sides of the bilateral upper extremities and among both groups of patients. CONCLUSION: The use of ARD for RTE (recalcitrant tennis elbow) indicates a significantly earlier return to work (RTW) at the same or lower intensity level compared to the standard CIC therapy protocol. Objective grip strength was comparable to the non-affected side and among the two groups of patients receiving two different management modalities. Comparable patient-reported satisfaction and residual lateral elbow pain were also noted among both the groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective, comparative study, level III.
Asunto(s)
Satisfacción del Paciente , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tratamiento Conservador , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Reinserción al Trabajo , Artroscopía/métodos , Dolor , ArtralgiaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Radial tunnel syndrome (RTS) is characterized by nerve compression affecting the posterior interosseous nerve branch in the forearm, and its symptoms often overlap with those of lateral epicondylitis (LE). The purpose of this study was to examine the epidemiology of RTS, frequency of injections and surgical release, and overlap of RTS with LE. METHODS: We queried the PearlDiver database to identify RTS in patients older than 18 years. Demographic data, diagnostic or therapeutic injection within 30 days of diagnosis, surgical release within 1 year of diagnosis, and 90-day postoperative complication rates were evaluated. Using International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, laterality codes, we also determined the number of patients who had same-side RTS and LE and the proportion of patients who subsequently underwent simultaneous RT release and LE debridement. RESULTS: The prevalence of RTS in a representative United States insurance database was 0.091%, and the annual incidence was 0.0091%. There were 75,459 patients identified with an active RTS diagnosis. The mean age at the time of diagnosis was 52 years (range, 18-81 years), 55% were women, and 1,833 patients (2.4%) underwent RT release within 1 year. Fewer than 3% of the patients received an injection within 30 days of RTS diagnosis. The 90-day postoperative complication rates were low: 5% of the patients required hospital readmission and 2.1% underwent revision surgery. Approximately 5.7% of the patients with RTS also had a diagnosis of LE on the same side within 6 months of RTS diagnosis. In patients with ipsilateral RTS and LE who underwent surgery, 59.1% underwent simultaneous RT release and LE debridement, whereas 40.9% underwent isolated radial tunnel release. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of a large insurance database showed that the diagnosis of RTS is rarely assigned, suggesting that the incidence of this nerve compression is low. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic III.
Asunto(s)
Neuropatía Radial , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Femenino , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Masculino , Neuropatía Radial/diagnóstico , Neuropatía Radial/tratamiento farmacológico , Neuropatía Radial/cirugía , Codo de Tenista/epidemiología , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Antebrazo , Nervios Periféricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lateral epicondylitis is a chronic tendinopathy of humeral origin of the common extensor tendon. Most patients show improvement after nonoperative treatment. However, 4% to 11% of patients require surgical treatment. Although corticosteroid injection is one of the most commonly applied nonoperative treatment methods, to the authors' knowledge, no study has reported the effect of the number of preoperative corticosteroid injections on the final postoperative outcome. Thus, the objective of this study was to determine the effect of the number of preoperative corticosteroid injections on postoperative clinical outcomes. HYPOTHESIS: The number of corticosteroid injections before surgical treatment does not affect postoperative clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: As a retrospective review, from January 2007 to December 2019, a total of 99 patients who had undergone surgical treatment of lateral epicondylitis with a modified Nirschl technique were enrolled. The number of preoperative corticosteroid injections was investigated by medical record review. Outcome measurements included visual analog pain scale; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score; Mayo Elbow Performance Score; and the Nirschl and Pettrone grade. Grip power and wrist extension power were measured using a digital dynamometer. RESULTS: A total of 99 patients were included in this study. The mean total number of injections of patients was 4.37 ± 2.46 times (range, 1-15 times). Total duration of nonoperative treatment before surgery was 25.4 ± 20.5 months (range, 4-124.8 months). The mean postoperative follow-up period was 42.8 ± 28.0 months (range, 12-110 months). For all injection numbers, clinical scores showed significant improvement in visual analog pain scale, DASH score, Mayo elbow score, grip power, and wrist extension power after surgery. Regression analysis showed that the degree of improvement according to the injection number was not statistically significant. The Nirschl and Pettrone grade was excellent in 82 (82.8%) patients, good in 14 (14.1%) patients, fair in 2 (2%) patient, and failure in 1 (1%) patient. CONCLUSION: The number of preoperative corticosteroid injections does not appear to affect postoperative clinical outcomes of patients with lateral epicondylitis who undergo surgery with a modified Nirschl technique.
Asunto(s)
Tendinopatía , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Codo de Tenista/tratamiento farmacológico , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Corticoesteroides/uso terapéutico , Inyecciones , Codo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Surgical treatment of lateral epicondylitis is reserved for patients who, despite extensive conservative therapy, do not experience satisfactory relief of symptoms. As an alternative to the open procedure, arthroscopic debridement of the extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) muscle is a simple and standardized procedure. The arthroscopic approach also enables the additional treatment of intra-articular pathologies such as loose bodies or osteochondral lesions. After diagnostic arthroscopy, the attachment of the ECRB is visualized via the anteromedial portal, so that under visual control the debridement of the tendon fibers of the ECRB and its bony insertion site can be performed via the anterolateral portal. Postoperatively, there is no restriction of movement of the elbow joint. The outcome after arthroscopic ECRB debridement described in the literature is equivalent to that of other surgical techniques.
Asunto(s)
Músculo Esquelético , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Desbridamiento/métodos , Músculo Esquelético/cirugía , Codo/patología , Tendones/cirugía , Codo de Tenista/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Epicondylosis of the elbow are common pathologies, with a higher incidence for radial epicondylosis. Approximately 90% are self-limiting under conservative treatment. TREATMENT: Multiple surgical procedures exist for the treatment of refractory cases. Arthroscopic treatment has been described for both radial and medial pathologies. Open and arthroscopic procedures show equivalent results in the surgical treatment of radial epicondylosis. This paper describes the most common open surgical procedures for the treatment of radial epicondylosis. Furthermore, the pros and cons of the arthroscopic versus the open approach are discussed, and the indications for an open surgical procedure for radial pathologies are highlighted. The authors believe that the open technique represents the standard treatment in the surgical treatment of ulnar epicondylosis. LIMITATIONS: Arthroscopic procedures have been described, but studies comparing the clinical outcome versus open surgical treatment are lacking. The anatomic proximity of the flexor origin to the ulnar nerve with the risk of iatrogenic damage is another limiting factor. In addition, concomitant pathologies on the ulnar side can better be ruled out preoperatively, so that arthroscopy has a rather low significance in the treatment of ulnar epicondylosis.
Asunto(s)
Articulación del Codo , Tendinopatía del Codo , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Desbridamiento/métodos , Codo/cirugía , Articulación del Codo/cirugíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The aim of this study is to confirm that the involvement of arthroscopy in the surgical treatment of painful elbow syndrome, when proper and long enough conservative treatment failed, has better results than open radial epicondylitis surgery alone. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 144 patients included 65 men and 79 women, with the mean age of 45.3 years, namely 44.4 years (range 18-61 years) in men and 45.8 years (range 18-60 years) in women. Each patient was clinically examined, an anteroposterior and lateral X-ray of the elbow were performed, and proper therapy was chosen - either primary diagnostic and therapeutic arthroscopy followed by open epicondylitis surgery or primary open epicondylitis surgery alone. The treatment effect was evaluated by using the QuickDASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) scoring system at 6 months after surgery. RESULTS Out of the total group of 144 patients, 114 (79%) patients completed the questionnaire. All the results of the QuickDASH score in our group of patients are in the better half (0-5 very good, 6-15 good, 16-35 satisfactory, over 35 poor), with the mean value 5.63 (in men the mean value was 2.95-2.27 for the combination of arthroscopic and open procedure of LE, 4.55 for open procedure of LE, while in women the mean value was 7.50-6.82 for the combination of arthroscopic and open procedure of LE, 9.09 for open procedure of LE only). Altogether 96 patients (72%) experienced full pain relief. In patients treated with a combination of arthroscopic and open surgery, a higher percentage of patients reported full relief (53 patients, 85%) compared to the patients treated with the open method alone (21 patients, 62%). DISCUSSION By involving arthroscopy in the surgical treatment of patients with lateral elbow pain syndrome after unsuccessful conservative treatment, a successful and early solution to the problem was achieved in 72% of patients. The advantage of elbow arthroscopy over the conventional approach to the treatment of lateral epicondylitis consists mainly in the opportunity to observe intraarticular structures, thus provide a detailed view of the entire joint without the need for direct extensive joint opening, which makes it possible to exclude other causes of problems (e. g. chondromalacia of the radial head, loose body and other intraarticular abnormalities). At the same time, we can treat this source of problems with minimum burden placed on the patient. CONCLUSIONS Arthroscopic examination of the elbow joint makes it possible to diagnose all potential intraarticular sources of difficulties. Simultaneous elbow arthroscopy and open treatment of radial epicondylitis (release of ECRB or EDC, ECU, necrotic tissue excision, deperiostation and radial epicondyle microfractures) is a safe method with low morbidity, faster rehabilitation and return to the original activities based on subjective evaluation of patients and objective scoring. Key words: lateral epicondylitis, radiohumeral plica, elbow arthroscopy.
Asunto(s)
Articulación del Codo , Codo de Tenista , Masculino , Humanos , Femenino , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Artroscopía/métodos , Radio (Anatomía) , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , ArtralgiaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The radial tunnel syndrome (RTS) is an entrapment of the radial nerve in the forearm. It is characterized by pain focused on the trapping area in the proximal forearm as well as pain radiated down the forearm. The syndrome is more common in men and in our estimation, there is a circumstantial connection to the continuous use of the computer keyboard. Radial tunnel syndrome is a consequence of nerve entrapment in the tunnel, which is formed from a covering consisting of the supinator muscle and the distal margins of this muscle. There is a clear association between radial tunnel syndrome and the occurrence of tennis elbow. The sensitivity in nearby locations along with the lack of familiarity of some of the clinicians with RTS lead to misdiagnosis and therefore, even to mistreatment in some cases. The physical examination is the most important means of making the correct diagnosis. The treatment of radial tunnel syndrome is divided into the conservative one in which emphasis is placed on physiotherapy and mobilizations of the nerve and the surgical one during which decompression of the radial canal is performed and in fact release of pressure at the exact anatomical location.
Asunto(s)
Síndromes de Compresión Nerviosa , Neuropatía Radial , Codo de Tenista , Masculino , Humanos , Neuropatía Radial/diagnóstico , Neuropatía Radial/etiología , Neuropatía Radial/terapia , Nervio Radial/cirugía , Codo , Codo de Tenista/diagnóstico , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Síndromes de Compresión Nerviosa/diagnóstico , Síndromes de Compresión Nerviosa/etiología , Síndromes de Compresión Nerviosa/cirugía , DolorRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To evaluate midterm outcome of lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) repair with triceps autograft in patients with PLRI under recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis. METHODS: In total, 25 elbows (23 patients) with recalcitrant epicondylitis longer than 12 months were included into this retrospective study. All patients underwent arthroscopic instability examination. In 18 elbows (16 patients, mean age 47.4 years, range 25-60), PLRI was verified, and an LUCL repair using an autologous triceps tendon graft was performed. Clinical outcome was evaluated before and at least 3 years after surgery using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form-Elbow Score (ASES-E), Liverpool Elbow Score (LES), Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation score (PREE), Subjective Elbow Value (SEV), quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score (qDASH), and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Postoperative satisfaction with the procedure and complications were recorded. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were available at a mean follow-up of 66.4 months (range 48-81). Patient satisfaction postoperatively was reported in 15 elbows as excellent (90%-100%) and 2 as moderate, with 93.1% overall. All scores of the 3 female and 12 male patients significantly increased from pre- to the postoperative follow-up (ASES: 28.3 ± 10.7 to 54.6 ± 12.1, P < .001; MEPI: 49.2 ± 8.3 to 90.5 ± 15.4, P < .001; PREE: 66.1 ± 14.9 to 11.3 ± 23.5, P < .001; qDASH: 63.2 ± 21.1 to 11.5 ± 22.6, P < .001; VAS: 8.75 ± 1.0 to 1.5 ± 2.0, P < .001). All patients suffered from high extension pain preoperatively, which was reported to be relieved after surgery. No recurrent instability or major complication occurred. CONCLUSION: The repair and augmentation of the LUCL with a triceps tendon autograft reached significant improvements; hence, it seems to be a good treatment option for posterolateral elbow rotatory instability with promising midterm results under a low rate of recurrent instability.
Asunto(s)
Ligamento Colateral Cubital , Ligamentos Colaterales , Articulación del Codo , Inestabilidad de la Articulación , Codo de Tenista , Reconstrucción del Ligamento Colateral Cubital , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reconstrucción del Ligamento Colateral Cubital/efectos adversos , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Codo de Tenista/complicaciones , Brazo/cirugía , Autoinjertos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Ligamento Colateral Cubital/cirugía , Tendones/trasplante , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , Inestabilidad de la Articulación/etiología , Ligamentos Colaterales/cirugíaRESUMEN
Tennis elbow (lateral epicondylitis or lateral elbow tendinopathy) is a self-limiting condition in most patients. Surgery is often offered to patients who fail to improve with conservative treatment. However, there is no evidence to support the superiority of surgery over continued nonoperative care or no treatment. New evidence also suggests that the prognosis of tennis elbow is not influenced by the duration of symptoms, and that there is a 50% probability of recovery every three to four months. This finding challenges the belief that failed nonoperative care is an indication for surgery. In this annotation, we discuss the clinical and research implications of the benign clinical course of tennis elbow.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(2):109-111.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Musculoesqueléticas , Tendinopatía , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Tratamiento Conservador , ProbabilidadRESUMEN
Lateral epicondylitis is a commonly encountered and persistent problem in the active, middle-aged population, with a reported annual incidence as high as 3.4%. Lateral epicondylitis is often treated successfully with conservative measures but may necessitate surgical intervention in refractory cases. Most of the review literature has failed to definitively identify arthroscopic or open debridement as the superior surgical approach. We favor the arthroscopic approach because it allows for the examination and treatment of concomitant intra-articular pathologies, which may be underappreciated on magnetic resonance imaging, and for minimal disruption of the superficial extensors to access the pathologic structures. In addition, this approach often allows for a quick resolution of symptoms and expeditious return to work and sport with a low rate of complications or revisions. For surgeons who are not experienced in elbow arthroscopy, the option of open debridement remains a reasonable approach. However, our preferred management of surgically indicated tennis elbow is arthroscopic repair of the affected extensor tendons along with addressing any concomitant pathology, when present. In our opinion, this leads to optimized long-term outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Articulación del Codo , Cirujanos , Codo de Tenista , Persona de Mediana Edad , Humanos , Codo , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Artroscopía/métodos , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , Articulación del Codo/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Medial epicondylitis (ME) is a pathological condition that arises in laborers and athletes secondary to repetitive wrist flexion and forearm pronation causing degeneration of the common flexor tendon. Although nonoperative management has demonstrated high rates of success, no standardized surgical technique has been established for situations when operative management is indicated. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the surgical treatment options for ME and evaluate the associated patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We hypothesized that surgical management of ME would vary across studies but no technique would prove to be superior. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Searches were conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cumulative Index of Nursing Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane databases between 1980 and April 2020. All level 1 to 4 studies were identified that focused on surgical management and PROs in the setting of ME. Description of surgical technique and PROs were required for inclusion. Investigators independently dually abstracted and reviewed the studies for eligibility. Weighted means were calculated for demographic characteristics and available PROs. RESULTS: Overall, 851 studies were identified according to the search criteria. A total of 16 studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and therefore were evaluated. Three surgical techniques were found: open (13 studies), arthroscopic (2 studies), and percutaneous (1 study). Descriptions of the open technique were subdivided into those with (7 studies) and without (6 studies) common flexor tendon repair. Analysis included 479 elbows; patients were primarily male (58.3%) with a weighted mean age of 47.2 years. Weighted mean follow-up was 4.6 years. Tennis and manual laborer were the most common sport and occupation, respectively. Surgical success ranged from 63% to 100%, with a low complication rate of 4.3%. Success rates for return to sports and work were 81%-100% and 66.7%-100%, respectively, and only 1 study reported a return to work rate <90%. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that surgical intervention for refractory ME often has a high success rate. Regardless of surgical technique performed, patients generally demonstrated an improvement in PROs, and an encouraging number returned to work with limited complications. Further investigation is necessary to determine superiority among open, arthroscopic, and percutaneous techniques.
Asunto(s)
Tendinopatía del Codo , Deportes , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Atletas , TendonesRESUMEN
Lateral epicondylitis, also known as tennis elbow, is an overuse tendinopathy of the common extensor origin of the elbow in patients involved in repetitive movement of the wrist and forearm. Lateral epicondylitis is a self-limiting condition, with operative management only recommended in severe, recalcitrant cases. This article reviews the recent updates on operative and non-operative management of lateral epicondylitis.
Asunto(s)
Articulación del Codo , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Codo , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , Extremidad Superior , Articulación de la MuñecaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: To compare complication rates and 5-year reoperation rates between open debridement (OD) and arthroscopic debridement (AD) for lateral epicondylitis. METHODS: The PearlDiver MUExtr database (2010-2019) was reviewed for patients diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis (queried by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision [ICD-10] codes) undergoing OD or AD of the common extensor tendon without repair (queried by Current Procedural Terminology codes). Patients were stratified into 2 cohorts: those who underwent AD and those who underwent OD. Nonoperative treatment modalities were reported for both groups within 1 year before index procedure. The rates of 90-day postoperative complications were compared, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for complications. The 5-year reoperation rates, using laterality-specific ICD-10 codes, were also compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In total, 19,280 patients (OD = 17,139, AD = 2,141) were analyzed in this study. The most common nonoperative treatments for patients who underwent OD or AD were corticosteroid injections (49.5% vs 43.2%), physical therapy (24.8% vs 25.7%), bracing (2.8% vs 3.2%), and platelet-rich plasma injections (1.3% vs 1.0%). There were no significant differences in radial nerve injuries, hematomas, surgical site infections, wound dehiscence, and sepsis events between the 2 procedures (P = .50). The 5-year reoperation rate was not significantly different between the AD (5.0%) and OD (3.9%) cohorts (P = .10). CONCLUSIONS: For lateral epicondylitis, both AD and OD of the extensor carpi radialis brevis (without repair) were found to have low rates of 90-day adverse events, with no significant differences between the 2 approaches. Similarly, the 5-year reoperation rate was low and not statistically different for those treated with OD or AD. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, cross-sectional study.
Asunto(s)
Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Codo de Tenista/complicaciones , Reoperación , Desbridamiento/métodos , Estudios Transversales , Músculo Esquelético/cirugía , Artroscopía/métodos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
There is considerable controversy regarding the optimal approach (open vs arthroscopic) of releasing and/or debridement for the treatment of tennis elbow (TE). The aim of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes of the two techniques by quantitatively synthesizing outcome data. The study was performed by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and Elsevier databases between January 1995 and April 2022 for a minimum follow-up of 6 months. The searching strategy was "(tennis elbow [Title/Abstract] OR lateral epicondylitis [Title/Abstract]) AND (open [Title/Abstract] OR arthroscopic [Title/Abstract] OR release [Title/Abstract] OR debridement [Title/Abstract] OR surgery [Title/Abstract])". The quality of each study was investigated using the Coleman Methodology Score. In total, 1411 (693 open, 718 arthroscopic) elbows in 1392 patients who underwent releasing and debridement for tennis elbow were identified. The mean Coleman Methodology Score for the included studies was 55.2 ± 8.6 (open: 55.0 ± 9.4, arthroscopic: 55.8 ± 8.2). Improved clinical results were achieved after treatment with either open or arthroscopic treatment. The surgical success rate was 95.6% in open surgery and 92.4% in arthroscopic management. The complication rates were 2.2% and 1.5% for open and arthroscopic procedures, respectively. Similar subjective and objective outcomes, and surgical success rate were observed in patients with both techniques. Patients who had undergone arthroscopic release seemed to return to work earlier (5.3 weeks vs 7.1 weeks). To draw more definite conclusions, high-quality long-term follow-up randomized controlled trials are needed.
Asunto(s)
Articulación del Codo , Codo de Tenista , Humanos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Codo de Tenista/cirugía , Artroscopía/métodos , Articulación del Codo/cirugía , Desbridamiento/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This retrospective study compared the outcomes after open and arthroscopic treatment of chronic medial epicondylitis (ME). METHODS: The study included 44 elbows in 38 patients: 25 (29-72 years) in the open group and 19 (27-70 years) in the arthroscopy group. The indications for ME surgery were failed conservative therapy for more than 3 months, symptom duration exceeding 6 months, and persistent severe pain. We used radiography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging assessments. The clinical assessment included operating time, range of motion, grip strength, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, and complications. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 20.2 (12-58) months. The mean operating time was significantly longer in the arthroscopy group (32.5 vs. 23.5 minutes; P = .029). In both groups, all outcome measures improved significantly after surgery and there were no significant differences between the DASH scores (preoperative 44.8 vs. 43.9, postoperative 12.5 vs. 13.2), grip strength (preoperative 72.2 vs. 66.8, postoperative 84.8 vs. 83.6), and VAS scores (preoperative 8.5 vs. 8.2, postoperative 1.0 vs. 1.1) in the open and arthroscopy groups. The outcomes were excellent or good in 20 patients (80%) in the open group and 16 (84%) in the arthroscopy group. The only complication was 1 case of transient ulnar neuropathy in the open group. CONCLUSION: Open and arthroscopic techniques were very effective and comparable for treating chronic ME. The surgeon can choose either technique for treating chronic ME.