Surgical treatment of lateral epicondylitis: A systematic review

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (Impact Factor: 2.88). 11/2007; 463(463):98-106. DOI: 10.1097/BLO.0b013e3181483dc4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT For the minority of people with lateral epicondylitis who do not respond to nonoperative treatment, surgical intervention is an option, but confusion exists because of the plethora of options. The surgical techniques for treating lateral epicondylitis can be grouped into three main categories: open, percutaneous, and arthroscopic. Our primary question was whether there was clear evidence suggesting one of these three approaches was superior in relieving pain, restoring strength, or reducing time to return to work. A 2002 Cochrane Collaboration Database review found no conclusions could be drawn regarding the efficacy of operative treatment given the lack of controlled trials. Although there is not enough literature to conduct a meta-analysis, we systematically reviewed the available literature to address our questions. Although there are advantages and disadvantages to each procedure, no technique appears superior by any measure. Therefore, until more randomized, controlled trials are done, it is reasonable to defer to individual surgeons regarding experience and ease of procedure.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lateral epicondylitis, or tennis elbow, is the most common cause of elbow pain. This degenerative condition can manifest as an acute process lasting < 3 months or a chronic process often refractory to treatment. Symptom resolution occurs in 70% to 80% of patients within the first year. A "watch-and-wait" approach can be an appropriate treatment option, although physical therapy has been shown to be an effective first-line therapy. Corticosteroids, while providing relief of pain in the acute setting, may be detrimental to recovery in the long term. Platelet-rich plasma injections, although recently well publicized, have not been proven by well-controlled clinical trials to be effective therapy. For patients with symptoms refractory to conservative management, surgical intervention has shown to be a successful treatment modality.
    The Physician and sportsmedicine 05/2012; 40(2):34-40. DOI:10.3810/psm.2012.05.1963 · 1.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose In recalcitrant epicondylitis innumerable operative techniques have been published, nevertheless a certain percentage of patients remains symptomatic after operative treatment. We developed an individual, systematic diagnostic pathway including arthroscopic assessment of elbow stability to identify the optimal and respectively less invasive therapy. Methods We so far included 40 patients with recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis (mean age 46 +/- 11). 5 patients had previous surgery. In all patients, we did an elbow arthroscopy and a systematic arthroscopic stability testing. 25 patients were treated exclusively arthroscopically once instability was excluded. In 13 patients with slight instability, we did an open debridement of the lateral tendon complex and local refixation. Two patients with severe instability were treated with open debridement and additional stabilization of the LUCL with a trizeps graft. With a minimum follow-up of 1 year, we assessed the DASH score and subjective patient satisfaction. Results Mean follow-up was 24 +/- 12 months, mean duration of symptoms before surgery was 19 +/- 18 months. The mean DASH score at follow-up was 22 +/- 19.36 patients reported symptoms improvement, 34 patients would repeat surgery given the same situation; in 30 cases, patients expectations had been fulfilled. We did not observe any intraoperative complications or infections. One patient developed joint stiffness requiring reoperation. Conclusion Using a systematic diagnostic pathway including assessment of elbow stability and consecutive individualized, respectively, less invasive surgical procedure we acquired high patients satisfaction and good clinical outcome with a low complication rate.
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 09/2014; 134(12). DOI:10.1007/s00402-014-2087-4 · 1.31 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the results in the outpatient treatment of recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis with release of the common extensor origin according to Hohmann and to determine any prognostic factors. Eighty tennis elbows in 77 patients with a characteristic history of activity-related pain at the lateral epicondyle interfering with the activities of daily living refractory to conservative care for at least 6 months and a confirmatory physical examination were included. Clinical outcome was evaluated using the QuickDASH score system. Data were collected before the operation and at the medians of 18 months (range 6-36 months; short term) and 4 years (range 3-6 years; medium term) postoperatively. The mean QuickDASH was improved both at the short- and the medium-term follow-ups and did not change significantly between the follow-ups. At the final follow-up, the QuickDASH was improved in 78 out of 80 elbows and 81% was rated as excellent or good (QuickDASH<40 points). We found a weak correlation between residual symptoms (a high QuickDASH score) at the final follow-up and high level of baseline symptoms (r=0.388), acute occurrence of symptoms (r=0.362), long duration of symptoms (r=0.276), female gender (r=0.269) and young age (r=0.203), whereas occurrence in dominant arm, a work-related cause or strenuous work did not correlate significantly with the outcome. Open lateral extensor release performed as outpatient surgery results in improved clinical outcome at both short- and medium-term follow-ups with few complications. High baseline disability, sudden occurrence of symptoms, long duration of symptoms, female gender and young age were found to be weak predictors of poor outcome. Case series, Level IV.
    Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy 03/2011; 19(6):1023-7. DOI:10.1007/s00167-011-1477-1 · 2.84 Impact Factor