Risks of neurovascular injury in elbow arthroscopy: starting anteromedially or anterolaterally?

Pediatric Patients Who Underwent Elbow Arthroscopy Had an 86% Return-to-Sport Rate, a 12% Reoperation Rate, and a 3.7% Complication Rate

Purpose

To assess the applicability and safety of elbow arthroscopy in the pediatric population at our institution by analyzing the indications and complications in a large pediatric patient series.

Methods

We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy at age 18 years or younger from 2006 to 2017 performed by a single fellowship-trained surgeon. The exclusion criteria were follow-up shorter than 8 weeks and open surgical procedures (not fully arthroscopic). Medical records were reviewed for baseline characteristics, indications for elbow arthroscopy, range of motion, complications, and reoperations.

Results

In total, 191 patients (64 boys and 127 girls) were included, with a median age of 15.5 years (interquartile range, 14.0-16.7 years). Indications for arthroscopic surgery were grouped into treatment of osteochondritis dissecans (60%), debridement for bony or soft-tissue pathology (35%), contracture release (3%), and diagnostic arthroscopy (3%). The complication rate was 3.7%, including 4 minor complications (3 superficial wound problems and 1 case of transient ulnar neuropathy) and 3 major complications (1 case of manipulation under anesthesia for stiffness, 1 deep infection, and 1 [unplanned] reoperation for persistent locking within 1 year of the index procedure). Subsequent surgery was required in 23 patients (12%) because of newly developed, persisting or recurring elbow problems. Of the patients, 86% were able to return to sports.

Conclusions

Pediatric elbow arthroscopy performed by an experienced surgeon using a standardized technique for a wide variety of elbow conditions has an acceptable complication rate that is similar to rates in the previously published literature on elbow arthroscopy in the pediatric and adult populations; however, a significant proportion of patients needed subsequent surgery in the following years.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Risk of nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy: ultrasonographic evaluation of preoperative patients

BACKGROUND

To clarify the real risk of nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy, the distances of the radial and median nerves to the elbow joint were investigated using ultrasonography in patients who underwent surgery.

METHODS

A total of 35 patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery of the elbow were investigated. The distances of the nerves to the capsule and bony landmarks were measured using ultrasonography. The radial nerve distances were measured at the capitellum, joint space, radial head, and radial neck levels. The median nerve distances were measured at the trochlear, joint space, and coronoid process levels. The patients were divided into 2 groups: nine patients in the hydrarthrosis (HA) group and 26 patients in the non-hydrarthrosis (non-HA) group. HA was defined as the intra-articular effusion on magnetic resonance imaging scans.

RESULTS

The radial nerve ran closer to the capsule at the radial neck level in the HA group than in the non-HA group (2.0 mm vs. 5.9 mm, P < .01). In the non-HA group, the radial nerve ran closer to the radial head than in the HA group (6.3 mm vs. 8.5 mm, P = .01). The median nerve ran closer to the capsule at the trochlear level in the HA group than in the non-HA group (5.2 mm vs. 8.8 mm, P < .01). Nerves at a distance of ≤2 mm from the capsule were found in 7 patients at the radial neck of the radial nerve and in 2 patients at the trochlear region of the median nerve in the HA group. In the non-HA group, they were found in 3 patients at the radial head and in 1 patient at the joint space of the radial nerve.

CONCLUSIONS

The dangerous locations for nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy vary according to hydrarthrosis, and this risk should be recognized during arthroscopic surgery.

Far Anterior Medial Portals in Complicated Elbow Arthroscopic Procedures: Safety Profile in a Cadaveric Model

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to describe the placement and evaluate the safety of the far anterior proximal and distal anteromedial portals by comparing them to previously defined portal techniques in a cadaveric model of the elbow.

Methods

Six paired (left and right) fresh, frozen cadaveric elbow joints were dissected. .62-mm Kirschner wires were placed at the literature-defined distal and proximal portal sites on right elbows. The proposed “far anterior” distal and proximal portals were established on the matched left elbows. The elbows were dissected to display the median and ulnar nerves. Digital calipers were used to measure distances from wires to nerves.

Results

For the distal portal, the literature-defined portals were a significantly greater distance (P = .014) from the ulnar nerve (31.22 mm) compared to the far anterior portals (24.65 mm). For the proximal portal, the far anterior portals were a significantly greater distance (P = .026) from the ulnar nerve (26.98 mm) than the literature-defined portals (13.75 mm). There was no significant difference between the far anterior and literature-defined proximal and distal portal techniques in relation to the median nerve.

Conclusions

Analysis of elbow arthroscopy anteromedial portal technique shows the far, anterior, proximal, and distal portals are a safe distance from the ulnar and median nerves. A portal modification that may address complicated elbow conditions is a more anterior placement of the medial portals to allow for better visualization and access.

Clinical Relevance

The elbow is a difficult joint in which to perform arthroscopic surgery. One option our institution has used for safe portal modification to address complicated elbow conditions is a further anterior placement of the medial portals to allow better visualization and access.

Safety of Anteromedial Portals in Elbow Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review of Cadaveric Studies

PURPOSE

To systematically review available literature comparing location and safety of 2 common anteromedial portals with nearby neurovascular structures in cadaveric models and to determine the correct positioning and preparation of the joint before elbow arthroscopy.

METHODS

The review was devised in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of original, cadaveric studies performed by experienced surgeons on male or female elbows evaluating anteromedial portal placement with regard to proximity of the arthroscope to neurovascular structures. Exclusion criteria consisted of case reports, clinical series, non-English language studies, and noncadaveric studies. Statistical analysis was done to measure reviewer reliability after scoring of each study.

RESULTS

During screening, 2,596 studies were identified, and 10 studies met final inclusion as original, cadaveric investigations of anteromedial portal proximity to neurovascular structures. The difference in distance between proximal and distal portals was <1 mm for the brachial artery and <1.5 mm for the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve, whereas the ulnar nerve was 4.17 mm further from the distal portal and the median nerve was 5.07 mm further from the proximal portal. Joint distension increased the distances of neurovascular structures to portal sites, with the exception of the ulnar nerve in distal portals. Elbow flexion to 90° increased distances of all neurovascular structures to portal sites.

CONCLUSION

The results show that the proximal anteromedial portal puts fewer structures at risk compared with the distal portal. Elbows in 90° flexion with joint distension carry a lower risk for neurovascular injury during portal placement. These findings suggest the proximal anteromedial portal to be the safer technique in anteromedial arthroscopy of the elbow.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Discrepancies in placement of portals have existed in the literature, indicating differing safety margins regarding surrounding neurovascular anatomy. The present study aims to link together the literature-based evidence to describe the safest anteromedial portal variation.

The Needle-and-Knife Technique: A Safe Technique for Anterolateral Portal Placement in Elbow Arthroscopy

Background:

Safe and effective portal placement is crucial for successful elbow arthroscopy. Various techniques for anterolateral portal placement in elbow arthroscopy have been described, yet radial nerve injuries are commonly reported.

Purpose:

To report on the technique and safety of anterolateral portal placement by the needle-and-knife method and its clinical applications.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A retrospective review was completed of patients who underwent an arthroscopic procedure in the anterior compartment of the elbow and anterolateral portal placement. Patients were evaluated immediately postoperatively and at subsequent visits and were monitored for signs of radial nerve injury.

Results:

A total of 460 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 309 (67%) underwent the needle-and-knife technique. There was 1 case (0.3%) of temporary radial nerve palsy. For the remaining 151 patients who underwent anterolateral portal placement by other techniques, there were 2 cases of temporary radial nerve palsy (1.3%). There were no cases of the needle-and-knife technique being unsuccessful or abandoned in lieu of a different technique. Use of the needle-and-knife technique increased over time with experience and practice. Initially, contraindications to this technique included impaired view of the lateral side of the anterior compartment of the elbow caused by severe intra-articular scar (65%), extensive synovitis (10%), or large osteophytes or loose bodies (10%). For the remaining patients (15%) who did not have portals placed via the needle-and-knife technique, alternate techniques were used for teaching purposes.

Conclusion:

The needle-and-knife technique is reproducible and easy to perform by a clinician instructed in its use and trained in elbow arthroscopy. Its main advantage is that it permits the surgeon to safely slide the knife along the lateral supracondylar ridge, releasing the scarred capsule and thereby increasing the available space in which to work. Enlarging the working space inside scarred and contracted elbows cannot be accomplished by distending the capsule.

Avoiding Neurological Complications of Elbow Arthroscopy

Elbow arthroscopy is an increasingly common procedure performed in orthopaedic surgery. However, because of the presence of several major neurovascular structures in close proximity to the operative portals, it can have potentially devastating complications. The largest series of elbow arthroscopies to date described a 2.5% rate of postoperative neurological injury. All of these injuries were transient nerve injuries resolved without intervention. A recent report of major nerve injuries after elbow arthroscopy demonstrated that these injuries are likely under-reported in literature. Because of the surrounding neurovascular structures, familiarity with normal elbow anatomy and portals will decrease the risk of damaging important structures. The purpose of this Technical Note is to review important steps in performing elbow arthroscopy with an emphasis on avoiding neurovascular injury. With a sound understanding of the important bony anatomic landmarks, sensory nerves, and neurovascular structures, elbow arthroscopy can provide both diagnostic and therapeutic intervention with little morbidity.

Nerve injuries do occur in elbow arthroscopy

PURPOSE

The purpose is to create more awareness as well as emphasize the risk of permanent nerve injury as a complication of elbow arthroscopy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy complicated by permanent nerve injury were retrospectively collected. Patients were collected using two strategies: (1) by word-of-mouth throughout the Dutch Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, and the Leiden University Nerve Centre, and (2) approaching two medical liability insurance companies. Medical records were reviewed to determine patient characteristics, disease history and postoperative course. Surgical records were reviewed to determine surgical details.

RESULTS

A total of eight patients were collected, four men and four women, ageing 21-54 years. In five out of eight patients (62.5%), the ulnar nerve was affected; in the remaining three patients (37.5%), the radial nerve was involved. Possible causes for nerve injury varied among patients, such as portal placement and the use of motorized instruments.

CONCLUSIONS

A case series on permanent nerve injury as a complication of elbow arthroscopy is presented. Reporting on this sequel in the literature is little, however, its risk is not to be underestimated. This study emphasizes that permanent nerve injury is a complication of elbow arthroscopy, concurrently increasing awareness and thereby possibly aiding to prevention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, case series.

Modified Anterolateral Portals in Elbow Arthroscopy: A Cadaveric Study on Safety

PURPOSE

To evaluate the proximity to the radial nerve on cadaveric specimens of 2 modified anterolateral portals used for elbow arthroscopy.

METHODS

Ten fresh cadaveric elbow specimens were prepared. Four-millimeter Steinman pins were inserted into 3 anterolateral portal sites in relation to the lateral epicondyle: (1) the standard distal anterolateral portal, (2) a modified direct anterolateral portal, and (3) a modified proximal anterolateral portal. These were defined as follows: direct portals 2 cm directly anterior to the lateral epicondyle, and proximal portals 2 cm proximal and 2 cm directly anterior to the lateral epicondyle. Each elbow was then dissected to reveal the course of the radial nerve. Digital photographs were taken of each specimen, and the distance from the Steinman pin to the radial nerve was measured.

RESULTS

The modified proximal anterolateral and direct anterolateral portals were found to be a statistically significant distance from the radial nerve compare to the distal portal site (P = .011 and P = .0011, respectively). No significant difference was found in the proximity of the radial nerve between the modified proximal and direct anterolateral portals (P = .25). Inadequate imaging was found at a single portal site for the proximal site; 9 specimens were used for analysis of this portal with 10 complete specimens for the other 2 sites.

CONCLUSIONS

In cadaveric analysis, both the modified proximal and direct lateral portals provide adequate distance from the radial nerve and may be safe for clinical use. In this study, the distal anterolateral portal was in close proximity of the radial nerve and may result in iatrogenic injury in the clinical setting.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This is a cadaveric analysis of 2 modified portal locations at the anterolateral elbow for use in elbow arthroscopy. Further clinical studies are needed prior to determining their absolute safety in comparison to previously identified portal sites.

Portal placement in elbow arthroscopy by novice surgeons: cadaver study

PURPOSE

In this anatomical cadaver study, the distance between major nerves and ligaments at risk for injury and portal sites created by trainees was measured. Trainees, inexperienced in elbow arthroscopy, have received a didactic lecture and cadaver instruction prior to portal placement. The incidence of iatrogenic injury from novice portal placement was also determined.

METHODS

Anterolateral, direct lateral, and anteromedial arthroscopic portals were created in ten cadavers by ten inexperienced trainees in elbow arthroscopy. After creating each portal, the trajectory of the portal was marked with a guide pin. Subsequently, the cadavers were dissected and the distances between the guide pin in the anterolateral, direct lateral, and anteromedial portals and important ligaments and nerves were measured.

RESULTS

The difference between the distance of the direct lateral portal and the posterior antebrachial cutaneous nerve (PABCN) (22 mm, p < 0.001), the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve (4.0 mm, p < 0.001), and the radial nerve (25 mm, p < 0.001) was different from the average reported distances in the literature. A difference was found between the distance of the anterolateral portal and the PABCN (32 mm, p < 0.001) compared to previous studies. Three major iatrogenic complications were observed, including: laceration of the posterior bundle of the medial ulnar collateral ligament, lateral ulnar collateral ligament midsubstance laceration, and median nerve partial laceration.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons increasingly consider arthroscopic treatment as an option for elbow pathology. In the present study a surgical complication rate of 30 % was found with novice portal placement during elbow arthroscopy. Furthermore, as the results from this study have indicated, accurate, precise, and safe portal placement in elbow arthroscopy is not easily achieved by didactic lecture and cadaver instruction session alone. Level of evidence V.

Tips to avoid nerve injury in elbow arthroscopy

Elbow arthroscopy is a technical challenging surgical procedure because of close proximity of neurovascular structures and the limited articular working space. With the rising number of elbow arthroscopies being performed nowadays due to an increasing number of surgeons performing this procedure and a broader range of indications, a rise in complications is foreseen. With this editorial we hope to create awareness of possible complications of elbow arthroscopy, particularly nerve injuries, and provide a guideline to avoid complications during elbow arthroscopy.

First 50 Pediatric and Adolescent Elbow Arthroscopies: Analysis of Indications and Complications

BACKGROUND

Elbow arthroscopy is a challenging, yet extremely productive procedure in orthopaedic sports medicine. The severely confined anatomy of the pediatric and adolescent elbow is particularly prone for perioperative complications. This study focuses on the indications and complications of the first 50 elbow arthroscopies in skeletally immature patients done in a specialized pediatric orthopaedic department.

PURPOSE

To review analysis of indications and complications in pediatric and adolescent elbow arthroscopy. We hypothesized that the complication rate in these patients is similar to adults.

METHODS

Data on 50 consecutive elbow arthroscopies were prospectively gathered in a dedicated database and retrospectively analyzed for indications and perioperative complications. All procedures were performed by a surgeon trained in orthopaedic sports medicine.

RESULTS

A total of 26 boys and 24 girls with a mean age of 13.6±3.3 years at the time of surgery and a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included.Fifty-eight percent were treated for osteochondritis dissecans, 24% for arthrofibrosis, 14% for a congenital disorder, and 4% for a posttraumatic problem other than arthrofibrosis. The complication rate was 8%, including 3 cases of transient neuropraxia and 1 superficial wound infection. There were no major complications such as septic arthritis, vascular injury, or permanent nerve damage. All complications resolved fully with conservative treatment, no revision were required.

DISCUSSION

Although osteochondritis dissecans is still the leading reason for such surgery, fractures and posttraumatic conditions are becoming more important. With a rate of 5% to 8% of minor, fully resolving complications such an increase is not a reason for concerns.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-case series.

Elbow arthroscopy: indications, techniques, outcomes, and complications

Elbow arthroscopy is a tool useful for the treatment of a variety of pathologies about the elbow. The major indications for elbow arthroscopy include débridement for septic elbow arthritis, synovectomy for inflammatory arthritis, débridement for osteoarthritis, loose body extraction, contracture release, treatment of osteochondral defects and selected fractures or instability, and tennis elbow release. Contraindications, technical considerations, and favorable outcomes following treatment with elbow arthroscopy require careful patient evaluation, a thorough understanding of anatomic principles, and proper patient positioning and portal selection to guide preoperative planning and overall patient care. Elbow arthroscopy is an effective procedure for the treatment of inflammatory arthritis, osteoarthritis, and lateral epicondylitis.

Synovial cyst of the antecubital fossa mimicking a brachial artery pseudoaneurysm: report of a case

Pseudoaneurysms of the brachial artery are common following a percutaneous cardiac catheterization. Synovial cysts are a commonly identified entity in patients with rheumatic diseases as well. We present a rare case of a synovial cyst in the elbow masquerading as an iatrogenic pseudoaneurysm of the brachial artery. A 51-year-old female patient presented with a pulsatile and painful mass in the right antecubital fossa. The medical history revealed a recent diagnostic cardiac catheterization at the same site and rheumatoid arthritis under oral treatment. Imaging investigations were not fully diagnostic. Because of the clinical suspicion of a thrombosed pseudoaneurysm, exploratory surgery was indicated. The pathologic examination of the specimen confirmed the diagnosis of a synovial cyst. Ultrasonography and computed tomography imaging are valuable in the everyday clinical practice but they do not always exclude an iatrogenic pseudoaneurysm, especially when the medical history is suspicious. Surgical removal is the proper treatment and pathologic examination sets the final diagnosis in such cases of diagnostic difficulty.

An antecubital fossa "cyst" caused by postoperative kinking of the brachial artery

A 77-year-old woman was referred to our staff for evaluation of a "cystic" mass in the antecubital fossa. The recent medical history included surgical excision of a median-nerve schwannoma. The postoperative course had been uneventful. The sonographic examination revealed kinking of the brachial artery; color Doppler imaging showed aliasing at the level of the kink. The case illustrates the value of ultrasound in the diagnosis of fluid-filled lesions of the elbow, including those that are rare and unexpected.

Arthroscopic elbow surgery, is it safe?

BACKGROUND

During the past 10 years, the use of arthroscopic elbow surgery has increased tremendously. The proximity of neurovascular structures and narrow joint spaces make it a technically demanding procedure with many potential complications. The purpose of this study was to report the complications in a large series of patients and identify factors that might have contributed to their occurrence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During an 8-year period, 200 elbow arthroscopies were performed by a single surgeon. All procedures were performed in a standardized fashion. Patient records were reviewed by independent observers. The minimum follow-up for all patients was 8 weeks.

RESULTS

The only major permanent complication (0.5%) identified was an ulnar nerve injury. Minor complications were identified in 14 patients (7%): 3 transient nerve palsies, 4 prolonged serous drainages or superficial wound infections, 6 persistent elbow contractures, and 1 mild increase in contracture. Of reported patients with complications, 9 (60%) had a history of trauma, fracture, or previous surgery. In 11 patients with direct surgery-related complications, 8 (73%) had a similar history.

CONCLUSION

The complications encountered in our series are well within the limits of earlier reports and show that with only a 0.5% rate of major complications, elbow arthroscopy is a relatively safe procedure for a wide variety of indications when performed in a standardized fashion. In patients with a history of trauma or previous surgery, the procedure is more challenging and, in less experienced hands, might lead to higher complication rates.

Elbow arthroscopy: a new setup to avoid visual paradox and improve triangulation

Elbow arthroscopy is a useful diagnostic and therapeutic tool for various conditions. Conventional arthroscopy with the patient in the prone or lateral position where the screen is placed on the opposite side makes it difficult to interpret the image, results in visual paradox, and is associated with difficult triangulation. We present a modified setup for the operating room to help eliminate these problems and improve triangulation.

Arthroscopic management of stiff elbow

Elbow stiffness is a common problem encountered by orthopedic surgeons. Various management options have been described in the literature, including conservative measures and open and arthroscopic surgery. Arthroscopic management of stiff elbow remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional results of arthroscopic management of stiff elbow.Thirty patients with stiff elbow underwent arthroscopic release surgery and were followed up for an average of 27.3 months. Surgery included anterior and posterior capsular release, coronoid process debridement, bony spur excision, and loose body removal. Postoperative outcome was assessed using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score and range of motion at the elbow. Mayo Elbow Performance Score increased from a mean 64.5 preoperatively to a mean 83.17 postoperatively. Range of motion also improved, from a mean preoperative extension and flexion of 22.83° and 96.83°, respectively, vs a mean 10.83° and 120.84°, respectively, at final follow-up. No intra- or postoperative complication was seen in any case. Underlying etiology and timing of surgery influenced the end result, with better results seen in patients with traumatic etiology and those with a shorter duration of symptoms.Arthroscopic release allows good visualization and rectification of intra-articular pathology and is a safe and effective tool for the management of stiff elbow.

Elbow arthroscopy: where are we now?

Elbow arthroscopy has developed over the past several years. Indications have evolved from simple loose body removal to the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. There have been few published reports of elbow arthroscopy compared to reports of knee or shoulder arthroscopy. Complications are more frequently reported after elbow arthroscopy than after arthroscopy of larger joints; therefore, careful attention to detail is necessary to help prevent neurovascular complications. Elbow arthroscopy can be a useful technique for the orthopaedic surgeon. This review will describe the operative setup and appropriate portal placement. Currently, several different pathologies have been addressed arthroscopically, including loose bodies, arthritis, fracture, instability, and osteochondritis dissecans.

Endoscopic extracapsular capsulectomy of the elbow: a neurovascularly safe technique for high-grade contractures

Arthroscopic management of elbow contractures is rapidly becoming the primary operative form of treatment for many physicians. Safety concerns remain the primary limiting factor in its more widespread use. We use an extra-articular starting point in extremely difficult fixed contractures, and this technique is documented in this report. The ulnar nerve is initially identified and protected with a palpating finger, while a periosteal elevator is introduced through a proximal medial skin portal. A channel between the anterior humeral cortex and anterior musculature is created, and an arthroscope is introduced through a proximal lateral portal at the lateral aspect of the channel. The anterior capsule is dissected from the musculature/neurovasculature under direct vision and safely excised once the medial and lateral margins are safely identified. A useful technical tip is that retractors can be placed in auxiliary portals to deflect the muscles and fat pad to improve the ability to perform dissection under direct vision.

Elbow arthroscopy: surgical techniques and rehabilitation

Elbow arthroscopy allows for direct visualization into the elbow joint, minimizes the potential for postoperative edema and discomfort, as well as protects the ligamentous structures. Arthroscopic procedures for the elbow and postoperative management are described for patients who have undergone loose body removal, synovectomy, and capsulectomy. The effect of early mobilization on the elbow complex and the role that splinting may play, as well as the controversies surrounding the use of continuous passive motion are discussed. Arthroscopy can significantly reduce the time frame, as well as improve the functional outcome, of a postoperative rehabilitative program. There is evidence to support the reduced need for postoperative therapy, as well as quicker return to premorbid activity. However, the evidence to suggest that there is significant difference between open vs. arthroscopic repairs with regard to functional outcome is inconsequential. Complications after an arthroscopic release can arise, such as prolonged edema, which may lead to protracted joint stiffness or delayed healing. Iatrogenic nerve injury is also a potential risk that may pose devastating consequences for the individual's functional outcome. In light of all these facts, it is imperative that arthroscopic procedures be performed by experienced surgeons, who can then refer the patient to a skilled hand therapist who will work in conjunction with and communicate to the physician if complications arise.

[Setting, portals and normal exploration]

Elbow arthroscopy was known as a risky procedure regarding the literature. A symposium of the French Arthroscopic Society in 2005 focused on up to date technics and indications. An overall joint exploration can performed through five precise portals.

Anatomic relationship between elbow arthroscopy portals and neurovascular structures in different elbow and forearm positions

Twenty fresh cadaveric elbows were used to evaluate the proximity of neurovascular structures to the six arthroscopic portals of the elbow at different positions. After distention of the joint, 4-mm Steinmann pins were introduced into the elbow from the portal's entry points. After surgical dissection, the proximity of the neurovascular structures to the pins was measured in 5 different positions. The radial nerve showed significant proximity to the anterolateral portal in full elbow flexion, full elbow extension, and forearm supination with 10%, 20%, and 10% nerve-pin contacts, respectively. The distance between the median nerve and medial portals was significantly decreased with full extension. This study demonstrated that the distance between the route of the scope and neurovascular structures might diminish significantly during elbow motion. Most of these movements are unavoidable in elbow arthroscopy, but maintaining certain positions for a considerable period of time or angulating the scope forcefully in these positions can cause nerve injury.

Ulnar nerve palsy after elbow arthroscopy

Reports of ulnar nerve injury as a result of elbow arthroscopy are rare in the literature. We report a case of ulnar nerve injury following arthroscopic debridement and retrograde drilling of the capitulum in a patient with symptomatic osteochondritis dissecans. The standard location of proximal medial portal placement is 2 cm proximal to the medial epicondyle at the level of the medial intermuscular septum. In this location, the ulnar nerve is protected from injury by the medial intermuscular septum. Extending this placement more proximally may negate this protection, leaving the nerve more susceptible to injury.

Nerve injuries about the elbow

Multiple neurovascular structures may be at risk during injuries or procedures about the elbow joint. An appreciation of the complex anatomy of the region, the appropriate evaluation procedures and processes to diagnose injury, and an understanding of treatment options are necessary for surgeons who treat elbow injuries. This article reviews the anatomy, diagnosis, and treatment options of injuries to neural structures about the elbow.

Arthroscopic excision of the radial head: Clinical outcome in 12 patients with post-traumatic arthritis after fracture of the radial head or rheumatoid arthritis

PURPOSE

We performed arthroscopic radial head excision in a series of patients with either post-traumatic arthritis after a radial head fracture or rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow as an expanded indication for elbow arthroscopy. The purpose of the study was to critically examine the results of arthroscopic chondroplasty of the radial head to determine the safety and effectiveness of the procedure.

TYPE OF STUDY

Outcome study and retrospective analysis.

METHODS

From 1990 to 1997, arthroscopic radial head resection was performed in 12 patients with either post-traumatic arthritis (n = 10, Mason type II or III) or with rheumatoid arthritis (n = 2). Functional outcome and radiographs were analyzed after a mean follow-up period of 39 months (range, 12 to 97 months). Elbow arthroscopy was performed using a standardized technique. The anterior three quarters of the radial head and 2 to 3 mm of the radial neck were resected with the abrader in the anterolateral portal and the arthroscope in the proximal medial portal. For resection of the posterior portion of the radial head, the abrader may be transferred to the mediolateral portal. This permits resection of the remnants of the radial head posteriorly and also at the proximal radioulnar joint.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, patients lacked 23 degrees (range, 5 degrees to 40 degrees ) of extension of the elbow on average. Mean flexion was 111 degrees (range, 60 degrees to 145 degrees ). Patients had unrestricted pronation (limitation of 5 degrees in 2 patients). Two patients had a lack of supination of 15 degrees and 30 degrees. Mean follow up was 39 months (range, 12 to 97 months). Postoperatively, patients lacked 9 degrees (range, 0 degrees to 20 degrees ) of extension of the elbow on average. Mean flexion was 136 degrees (range, 90 degrees to 150 degrees ). No patient had subjective or objective evidence of instability of the elbow. All patients except one reported significant improvement in pain relief and complete relief of mechanical symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

This technically demanding surgical procedure should be reserved for situations of persistent, restricted range of motion and chronic pain. Arthroscopic radial head resection combined with arthroscopic synovectomy relieves elbow stiffness. The surgeon is able to deal with the intrinsic joint pathology, as well as with accompanying symptoms such as synovitis, capsular contracture, or loose bodies.

Complications of elbow arthroscopy

BACKGROUND

Although the potential complications of elbow arthroscopy, including nerve injuries, have been described, the prevalence of their occurrence has not been well defined. The purpose of this paper is to describe the serious and minor complications in a large series of patients treated with elbow arthroscopy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 473 consecutive elbow arthroscopies performed in 449 patients over an eighteen-year period was conducted. Of the 473 cases, 414 were followed for more than six weeks. The most common final diagnoses were osteoarthritis (150 cases), loose bodies (112), and rheumatoid or inflammatory arthritis (seventy-five). The arthroscopic procedures included synovectomy (184), debridement of joint surfaces or adhesions (180), excision of osteophytes (164), diagnostic arthroscopy (154), loose-body removal (144), and capsular procedures such as capsular release, capsulotomy, and capsulectomy (seventy-three).

RESULTS

A serious complication (a joint space infection) occurred after four (0.8%) of the arthroscopic procedures. Minor complications occurred after fifty (11%) of the arthroscopic procedures. These complications included prolonged drainage from or superficial infection at a portal site after thirty-three procedures, persistent minor contracture of 20 degrees or less after seven, and twelve transient nerve palsies (five ulnar palsies, four superficial radial palsies, one posterior interosseous palsy, one medial antebrachial cutaneous palsy, and one anterior interosseous palsy) in ten patients. The most significant risk factors for the development of a temporary nerve palsy were an underlying diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (p < 0.001) and a contracture (p < 0.05). There were no permanent neurovascular injuries, hematomas, or compartment syndromes in our series, and all of the minor complications, except for the minor contractures, resolved without sequelae.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the prevalence of temporary or minor complications following elbow arthroscopy may be greater than previously reported. However, serious or permanent complications were uncommon.

Arthroscopic release for lateral epicondylitis: a cadaveric model

At least 10 different surgical approaches to refractory lateral epicondylitis have been described, including an arthroscopic release of the extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon. The advantages of an arthroscopic approach include an opportunity to examine the joint for associated pathology, no disruption of the extensor mechanism, and a rapid return to premorbid activities with possibly fewer complications. A cadaveric study was performed to determine the safety of this procedure. Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric upper extremities underwent arthroscopic visualization of the extensor tendon and release of the extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon. The specimens were randomized with regard to the use of either a 2.7-mm or a 4.0-mm 30 degree arthroscope through modified medial and lateral portals. Following this, the arthroscope remained in the joint, and the portal, cannula track, and surgical release site were dissected to determine the distance between the cannula and the radial, median, ulnar, lateral antebrachial, and posterior antebrachial nerves, and the brachial artery and the ulnar collateral ligament. No direct lacerations of neurovascular structures were identified; however, the varying course of the lateral and posterior antebrachial nerves place these superficial sensory nerves at risk during portal placement. As in previous reports, the radial nerve was consistently in close proximity to the proximal lateral portal (3 to 10 mm: mean, 5.4 mm). The ulnar collateral ligament was not destabilized. Arthroscopic release of the extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon appears to be a safe, reliable, and reproducible procedure for refractory lateral epicondylitis. Cadaveric dissection confirms these findings.

Arthroscopic resection of the radial head

The authors describe arthroscopic radial head resection in patients with post-traumatic arthritis after fractures of the radial head or in patients with rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow joint, as an expanded indication for elbow arthroscopy. Arthroscopic radial head resection allows the surgeon to deal with the intrinsic joint pathology, as well as with accompanying symptoms such as synovitis, capsular contracture, or loose bodies. The portals used are the proximal medial, anterolateral, and the midlateral portal. The anterior three quarters of the radial head and 2 to 3 mm of the radial neck are resected with the stone-cutting abrader in the anterolateral portal and the arthroscope in the proximal medial portal. For resection of the posterior portion of the radial head, the abrader may be transferred to the midlateral portal. This permits resection of the remnants of the radial head posteriorly and also at the proximal radioulnar joint. Arthroscopic treatment allows the patient to begin and maintain an aggressive postoperative physical therapy program immediately after surgery, thus decreasing the risk of anterior scarring and reoccurring contracture of the capsule of the elbow joint.

Arthroscopy of the elbow: anatomy, portal sites, and a description of the proximal lateral portal

Cadaveric studies were carried out to evaluate the safety and value of the standard portals used in elbow arthroscopy. The dissections were performed in 12 fresh cadaveric specimens. Each portal was assessed in terms of its safety with respect to nearby important structures. A proximal lateral portal was evaluated and has subsequently been used in 62 patients. A straight posterior (transhumeral) portal was also studied. We have found that in arthroscopy of the elbow joint, the proximal approaches (proximal medial and proximal lateral), are safer than the anteromedial and anterolateral approaches. All areas of the anterior compartment can be visualized using these two portals, and we recommend that they be the standard anterior portals used in elbow arthroscopy. All of the posterior approaches are safe.

Neuroanatomy in elbow arthroscopy

An injury to the median nerve from within the joint during an arthroscopic synovectomy prompted a study of the relationship of the nerves to the capsule and bones of the elbow. Six pairs of cadaveric elbows frozen in 90 degrees of flexion and one pair frozen in extension were sectioned at 5-mm intervals, and the distances from the major nerves to the bones and capsule were recorded. One elbow joint in each pair was filled with saline solution. Saline solution insufflation increased the nerve-to-bone distance with the elbow in flexion. The results were 12 mm for the median nerve and 6 mm for the radial nerve. The capsule-to-nerve distance was affected little by insufflation and was as narrow as 6 mm in three specimens. Extension eliminated the protective effects of insufflation and brought the nerves closer to the bone. These findings confirm (1) the importance of flexion and insufflation in portal placement, (2) that insufflation does not improve the capsule-to-nerve distance, and (3) the potential for "from within-out" injury in synovial procedures.

Arthroscopy of the elbow joint: A cadaveric study of portal placement

Sixteen fresh cadaver elbows were examined by arthroscopy and dissection to evaluate the usefulness and the anatomic relationships of seven previously described portals for elbow arthroscopy. Most of the examined portals were found to be relatively close to neurovascular structures. The nerves that were found to be located closest to the portals were the posterior antebrachial cutaneous nerve at the direct lateral and antero-lateral portals, the radial nerve at the antero-lateral portal, and the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve at the high and low antero-medial portals. The degree of flexion and fluid distension of the joint were found to influence the position of nerves and vessels in relation to the arthroscopy portals. At least three different portals were found to be required for thorough examination of the elbow joint. The combination of the low postero-lateral, the direct lateral, and the high antero-medial portals provided the largest visualized area.

Advances in elbow arthroscopy

Arthroscopy of the elbow is a very precise and demanding technique. Because of the proximity of neurovascular structures to the recommended portals, a thorough knowledge of regional and intraarticular anatomy is essential. The high degree of congruency of the articular surfaces and the relatively small capsular volume make sound arthroscopic skills a necessity. With proper precautions, the technique is safe and affords the opportunity to obtain valuable diagnostic information and to perform selected procedures without the morbidity of an arthrotomy.