Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Different Surgical Approaches for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Author:

Kholinne Erica12,Singjie Leonard Christianto13,Anastasia Maria1,Liu Felly4,Anestessia Ira Juliet2,Kwak Jae-Man5,Jeon In-Ho6

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Saint Carolus Hospital, Jakarta, Indonesia

2. Faculty Of Medicine, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia

3. Department of Orthopaedic & Traumatology, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia

4. Department of Orthopaedic & Traumatology, Padjajaran University, Bandung, Indonesia

5. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Uijeongbu Eulji Medical Center, College of Medicine, Eulji University, Uijeongbu, Republic of Korea

6. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Ulsan, College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Abstract

Background: Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is one of the most common causes of lateral elbow pain. When nonoperative treatment fails, 1 of the 3 surgical approaches—open, percutaneous, or arthroscopic—is used. However, determining which approach has the superior clinical outcome remains controversial. Purpose: To review the outcomes of different operative modalities for LE qualitatively and quantitatively. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This review was performed and reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies published in PubMed, Medline (via EBSCO), and ScienceDirect databases that treated LE with open, percutaneous, or arthroscopic approaches with at least 12 months of follow-up were included. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score. The primary outcome was the success rate of each operative treatment approach—open, percutaneous, and arthroscopic. Results: From an initial search result of 603 studies, 43 studies (n = 1941 elbows) were ultimately included. The arthroscopic approach had the highest success rate (91.9% [95% CI, 89.2%-94.7%]) compared with the percutaneous (91% [95% CI, 87.3%-94.6%]) and open (82.7% [95% CI, 75.6%-89.8%]) approaches for LE surgery with changes in the mean visual analog scale pain score of 5.54, 4.90, and 3.63, respectively. According to the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, the functional outcome improved in the arthroscopic group (from 54.11 to 15.47), the percutaneous group (from 44.90 to 10.47), and the open group (from 53.55 to 16.13). The overall improvement was also found in the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, the arthroscopic group (from 55.12 to 90.97), the percutaneous group (from 56.31 to 87.65), and the open group (from 64 to 93.37). Conclusion: Arthroscopic surgery had the highest rate of success and the best improvement in functional outcomes among the 3 approaches of LE surgery.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3