Elbow arthroscopy: early complications and associated risk factors

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.

Emergency department utilization after elbow arthroscopy

Background

Elbow arthroscopy has defined indications for which technical pearls and outcomes have been described. However, other aspects of the postoperative course, such as postprocedural emergency department (ED) visits, have received less attention. The current study defined the incidence and factors associated with ED visits in the 90 days following elbow arthroscopy by leveraging a large, national, multiinsurance, administrative database.

Methods

Adult patients who underwent elective elbow arthroscopy were identified in the 2010 to Q1 2022 PearlDiver Mariner161 national administrative database. Those who visited the ED in the 90 days following surgery were identified and compared to those who did not based on age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, geographic region of the United States, and insurance type by multivariate analyses. The timing (weeks following surgery), reasons for ED visit (elbow-related or not), and ED-to-hospital admission (presence or absence) were also assessed. Finally, the rate of those who were admitted during an ED visit was described.

Results

A total of 16,310 elbow arthroscopy patients were identified, of which ED visits in the 90 days following surgery were noted for 1086 (6.7%). ED visits were independently associated with younger age (odds ratio [OR, 95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.23 [1.17, 1.29] per decade decrease), higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (OR [95% CI]: 1.21 [1.19, 1.23] per 1-point increase), different geographic region (OR [95% CI]: 1.42 [1.19, 1.71] for Midwest relative to West), and insurance (OR [95% CI]: 1.88 [1.48, 2.39] for Medicaid relative to Commercial) (P < .001 for each). The incidence of all-cause ED visits was highest during the first two postoperative weeks and gradually decreased over the following weeks. The reason for ED visits related to the elbow decreased from 65% in month one, to 37.7% in month two, to 26.6% in month three. Of those visiting the ED, 12.4% went on to be admitted (for any reason).

Conclusion

A significant proportion of patients from a large cohort of elbow arthroscopy patients visited the ED at least once in the 90 days following surgery. The defined associated factors and timing of these ED visits can help optimize postoperative care pathways.

Hand and Upper Extremity Surgical Site Infection Rates Associated With Perioperative Corticosteroid Injection: A Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroid injection (CSI) has a relatively high benefit-to-risk ratio and is commonly administered to treat musculoskeletal conditions. However, perioperative CSI has been associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection. The literature suggests delaying surgery after CSI to minimize the risk of postoperative infection. We review the literature to summarize the most current knowledge on the association between perioperative CSI and infection rates for different hand and upper extremity procedures.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers conducted a literature search using PubMed and Web of Science databases (through October 1, 2022). The database searches used were (((injection) AND (infection)) AND (risk)) AND ((hand) OR (wrist) OR (elbow) OR (shoulder)). English-language articles were screened for infection rates associated with CSI given temporally around upper extremity surgery, focusing between 6 months preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively.

RESULTS

Nineteen articles including database queries and retrospective case-control or cohort studies were used after screening 465 articles. Most infection rates were increased in hand, wrist, elbow, and shoulder surgery between 3 months preoperatively and 1 month postoperatively. Intraoperative injection during elbow arthroscopy demonstrated increased infection rate relative to other upper extremity surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroid injection increased the risk of infection temporally around upper extremity surgeries; however, CSI provides benefits. The consensus regarding CSI timeline perioperatively has yet to be determined. The evidence supports an increased benefit-to-risk ratio when giving corticosteroids greater than 3 months preoperatively and greater than 1 month postoperatively for most upper extremity procedures, with relative contraindications within 1 month of upper extremity surgery.

Perioperative steroid injection in elbow arthroscopy

The goal of the present study was to evaluate the incidence of infection after perioperative intra-articular steroid injection during elbow arthroscopy. Starting from May 2019, we prospectively included all patients that underwent an elbow arthroscopy for various indications. All patients received preoperative antibiotics intravenously and a corticosteroid injection immediately after portal closure. Patients who needed ligamentous repair and aged below 18 years old were excluded. Final follow up of all patients was 3 months. In total, 108 elbow arthroscopies were performed in 100 patients. No major complications and 1 minor complication were seen. One patient developed a seroma that resolved spontaneously after 14 days without intervention or antibiotics. In this patient group, a perioperative corticosteroid injection following elbow arthroscopy did not increase the chance of infection.

Systematic review of intraoperative corticosteroid injections and the risk of infection in arthroscopic surgery

Background

Despite the fact that preoperative corticosteroid injections within three to six months of surgery increase the risk of postoperative infection, there is a growing trend of using corticosteroid injections intraoperatively as an effort to decrease postoperative pain and opiate use. Our aim with this review was to answer the question "Do intraoperative corticosteroid injections increase the risk of infections in arthroscopic surgery?"

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE, Cochrane, and PMC databases was conducted adhering to PRISMA 2020 guidelines after registration with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023459138). We included studies comparing infection rates in patients who received intraoperative corticosteroid injections (IOCSI) to those who received no injection. The MINORS risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of included studies.

Results

305 individual records were screened and a total of 8 studies met the criteria for inclusion in the study, containing data from over 700,000 patient records. All 7 retrospective studies showed an increase in infection rates and the single small randomized controlled trial had no infections in either the control or intervention group. The combined weighted odds ratio of infection rates in comparable studies was 2.23 95% CI (1.66-3.11).

Conclusions

Current data shows that IOCSIs more than double the risk of postoperative infection during arthroscopic surgery. Surgeons should consider and weigh the impact of infection to the minor clinical benefit corticosteroid injections add over other multimodal injections. We expect similar increases in infection rates in other surgeries where IOCSIs are used due to the inherent immunosuppressive mechanisms of corticosteroids.

Prevalence, Timing, Locational Distribution, and Risk Factors for Heterotopic Ossification After Elbow Arthroscopy

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic techniques aim to reduce complications and accelerate recovery of the elbow after treatments for posttraumatic stiffness, arthritis diseases, lateral epicondylitis, ligament reconstruction, and elbow trauma. However, data on the true prevalence and characteristics of heterotopic ossification (HO) formation after elbow arthroscopy are limited.

PURPOSE

To investigate the prevalence, timing, locational distribution, and risk factors of HO after elbow arthroscopy.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Data on 205 patients undergoing elbow arthroscopy by a single senior elbow surgeon at a single institution between May 2011 and January 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were evaluated at 2 weeks, 8 weeks, 6 months, and then annually after surgery or more frequently if HO developed, with a minimum of 1 year of postoperative follow-up. Postoperative anteroposterior and lateral elbow radiographs were taken at 2 weeks to rule out fracture and at 8 weeks to identify HO. The clinical outcomes were evaluated based on the pain visual analog scale; the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score; Mayo Elbow Performance Score; and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores before and after surgery. Bivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine factors affecting HO prevalence.

RESULTS

Thirteen (12 male, 1 female) of 205 (6.3%) patients developed HO, with 10 (76.9%) with HO that formed on the medial compartment of the elbow. Ten (76.9%) patients were diagnosed at 8 weeks after arthroscopic surgery, 1 (7.7%) at 6 months after surgery, and 2 (15.4%) at 12 months after surgery. HO was not found at 2 weeks after surgery in any patient. The mean follow-up time was 3.5 years (range, 1.0-11.8 years). Eleven asymptomatic patients were treated nonoperatively, and 2 symptomatic patients underwent HO excision arthroscopically or had a combination of open surgery and arthroscopy. Age was a protective factor for HO formation (odds ratio [OR], 0.953; 95% CI, 0.910-0.999; P = .047). The risk factors for HO formation were tourniquet time (OR, 1.042; 95% CI, 1.019-1.065; P < .001) and surgical time (OR, 1.026; 95% CI, 1.011-1.041; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Among 205 patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy, HO was a minor complication of elbow arthroscopy, with a prevalence rate of 6.3%, and was usually located on the medial compartment of the elbow. Although the presence of HO may not affect the clinical outcomes in most patients, it should be carefully monitored for a minimum of 8 weeks postoperatively. Younger age, longer tourniquet time, and longer surgical time contributed to HO formation after elbow arthroscopy.

Wide Range in Complication Rates Following Elbow Arthroscopy in Adult and Pediatric Patients: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review of complications associated with elbow arthroscopy in adults and children.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Studies reporting complications or reoperations after elbow arthroscopy with at least 5 patients were included. Based on the Nelson classification, the severity of complications was categorized as minor or major. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized clinical trials, and nonrandomized trials were assessed using the Methodological Items for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) tool.

RESULT

A total of 114 articles were included with 18,892 arthroscopies (16,815 patients). A low risk of bias was seen for the randomized studies and a fair quality for the nonrandomized studies. Complication rates ranged from 0% to 71% (median 3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8%-3.3%), and reoperation rates from 0% to 59% (median 2%; 95% CI, 1.8%-2.2%). A total of 906 complications were observed, with transient nerve palsies (31%) as the most frequent complication. According to Nelson classification, 735 (81%) complications were minor and 171 (19%) major. Forty-nine studies reported complications in adults and 10 studies in children, showing a complication rate ranging from 0% to 27% (median 0%; 95% CI, 0%-0.4%) and 0% to 57% (median 1%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.5%), respectively. A total of 125 complications were observed in adults, with transient nerve palsies (23%) as the most frequent complication, and 33 in children, with loose bodies after surgery (45%) as the most frequent complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Predominantly low-level evidence studies demonstrate varying complication rates (median 3%, range 0%-71%) and reoperation rates (median 2%, range 0%-59%) after elbow arthroscopy. Higher complication rates are observed after more complex surgery. The incidence and type of complications can aid surgeons in patient counseling and refining surgical techniques to further reduce the complication rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV; systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Editorial Commentary: Avoiding Complications in Elbow Arthroscopy: Know the Indications, Learn the Anatomy, and Master a Safe Technique

Elbow arthroscopy enables surgeons to treat a vast range of elbow injuries and pathologies in a minimally invasive manner. It has a lower morbidity rate and is often followed by a faster recovery than traditional open surgery unless it is followed by a serious complication. Although most complications are minor and transient, the incidence of both minor and major complications is considerably higher than that after arthroscopy of other joints, specifically the risk of neurovascular injury including permanent nerve injury because of the proximity of neurovascular structures. A recent review of 114 studies reported a median 3% incidence of complications and 2% incidence of reoperation, with transient nerve palsies accounting for about one third. Surgeon experience may influence complication rates; a survey suggested that surgeons need to experience more than 200 cases to be considered expert. In addition, patient-related factors such as obesity, female gender, age over 65 years, elevated blood sugar levels, hypercoagulable disorder, tobacco or alcohol use or both, as well as history of previous surgery and perioperative corticosteroid injections are identified as risk factors for complications after elbow arthroscopy. Keys to avoiding complications include precise surgical indications and understanding the 3-dimensional anatomy-especially the relationship of the various nerves to the portals and joint capsule.

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.

Have Elbow Arthroscopy Hospitalizations Decreased over the Years? An Epidemiological Italian Study from 2001 to 2016

This study describes the trends of elbow arthroscopy in Italy and other countries in order to evaluate the yearly rates of EA. Its purpose is for future epidemiological studies to be able to compare their data between countries in order to understand the reasons for the increasing and decreasing trends. Data for this study were obtained from National Hospital Discharge records (SDO) at the Italian Ministry of Health (INHS). Data regarding sex, age, region of residence, region of surgery, length of hospitalization, and procedure codes were included. In total, 2414 elbow arthroscopies were performed in Italy from 2001 to 2016 in the adult population. The highest number of procedures was found in the 40-44 and 45-49 years age groups. Males represented the majority of patients undergoing EA both in total and over the years. An increase from 2001 to 2010 and a decrease from 2010 to 2016 were reported in the present analysis. According to other studies, males of 40-44 and 45-49 years age groups represent the most treated patients. Further epidemiological studies would provide data that could be compared between countries, reaching a general consensus on the best indications for this procedure.

Application of ultrasound in avoiding radial nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy: a retrospective follow-up study

BACKGROUND

A safe and effective technique for anterolateral portal placement in elbow arthroscopy is significant. We compared the outcomes of patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy using different ultrasound-assisted techniques.

METHODS

From May 2016 to June 2021 a retrospective analysis on all patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy in our department was performed. Patients were separated into three groups: non-ultrasound; preoperative ultrasound; and intraoperative ultrasound. The minimum follow-up period was 1 year. Nerve injuries, visual analog scale (VAS), Mayo elbow-performance score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH), and range of motion (ROM) of the elbow were evaluated for comparison among the three groups pre- and post-operatively.

RESULTS

All 55 patients completed a 1-year follow-up: non-ultrasound (n = 20); preoperative ultrasound (n = 17); and intraoperative ultrasound (n = 18). There were 3 cases (15.0%) of transient radial nerve palsy in the non-ultrasound group. No nerve complications occurred in preoperative ultrasound and intraoperative ultrasound groups. The probability of postoperative radial nerve injury in the three groups was statistically different (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the VAS score, MEPS, DASH score, and ROM among the three groups at the follow-up evaluation (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Performing anterolateral portal placement during elbow arthroscopy with ultrasound-assisted techniques successfully avoided radial nerve injury.

Complications of Elbow Arthroscopic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Elbow arthroscopic surgery has been popularized and has made significant progress during the past 3 decades. The elbow joint is relatively small and is in close proximity to many neurovascular structures. These factors make elbow arthroscopic surgery technically demanding and liable to complications.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the rate of complications after elbow arthroscopic surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed to perform this systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched up to July 2021. All clinical studies that reported complications after elbow arthroscopic surgery were included; a total of 1208 articles were initially found. Case reports, reviews, abstracts, imaging studies, technique studies, nonclinical studies, and those not reporting postoperative complications were excluded. Complication rates were pooled across studies and reported as percentages. Complications were expressed as weighted proportions with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 95 studies (14,289 elbows) were included in the meta-analysis. The overall weighted complication rate was 11.0% (95% CI, 8.8%-13.5%), with postoperative stiffness being the most commonly encountered complication (4.5% [95% CI, 2.1%-7.6%]; 158/8818 procedures). The second most encountered complication was the need for subsequent surgery with a weighted proportion of 4.1% (95% CI, 2.9%-5.6%; 177/8853 procedures) followed by nerve injury with a weighted proportion of 3.4% (95% CI, 2.6%-4.3%; 267/13,725 procedures). The ulnar nerve was the most commonly injured nerve (2.6% [95% CI, 1.9%-3.4%]; 123/6290 procedures).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study showed that elbow arthroscopic surgery is a relatively safe procedure with low complication rates.

Comparison of arthroscopy versus percutaneous radiofrequency thermal ablation for the management of intra- and juxta-articular elbow osteoid osteoma: case series and a literature review

BACKGROUND

Today, intra-articular and juxta-articular osteoid osteomas are treated with arthroscopy and radiofrequency thermal ablation. However, for the case of an elbow joint, arguments are made for the use of a minimally invasive technique to be the optimal choice. This study aims to analyse our experiences of arthroscopically treated elbow osteoid osteomas and to compare it with the published results of both techniques.

METHODS

The retrospective study analyses the patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy ablation of an elbow osteoid osteoma at a single institution from January 2014 until March 2020. Clinical and diagnostic features, success and treatment failure rates, complications and tumour recurrence rates were all compared to 13 studies of intra-articular elbow osteoid osteoma arthroscopic ablation and 15 studies involving radiofrequency thermal ablation of intra-articular osteoid osteoma within different joints.

RESULTS

Four males and two females, with a mean age of 19.3 years, were encompassed. All the patients had immediate postoperative pain relief and improved range of motion. No tumour recurrences were observed during a median of 21.7 months. The literature review yielded 86.4% success rate, 68.2% successful biopsies, one minor complication and no recurrences following the arthroscopic ablation of an elbow osteoid osteoma; while radiofrequency thermal ablation of an intra-articular elbow osteoid osteoma yielded 96.3% success rate, 33.3% successful biopsies, no complications and 3.7% recurrence rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results are consistent with the published literature proving that arthroscopic ablation is an efficient method with low treatment failure rates and no recurrences in treating intra- and juxta-articular elbow osteoid osteomas. Advantages of arthroscopic ablation stem from the ability to visualise and safely deal with the lesion and the joint's reactive changes resulting in high biopsy rates, no recurrences and better postoperative elbow's range of motion. Still, the technique selection should be personalised considering the medical expertise of every institution.

Neurological Complications Following Arthroscopic and Related Sports Surgery: Prevention, Work-up, and Treatment

Arthroscopy of the shoulder, elbow, hip, and knee has become increasingly utilized due to continued advancements in technique, training, and instrumentation. In addition, arthroscopy is generally safe and effective in the utilization of joint preservation surgical techniques. The arthroscopist must utilize a thorough understanding of the surgical anatomy, detailed care with patient positioning, and safe instrumentation portals to prevent associated neurological injury. In the event of postoperative neurological complications, the physician must carefully document the patient history and physical examination while considering the utilization of additional imaging, testing, or surgical nerve exploration with a specialized team depending upon the severity of neurological injury. In this review, we discuss the prevention, evaluation, and treatment of neurological complications related for arthroscopic procedures of the shoulder, elbow, hip, and knee.

Complications in Elbow Arthroscopy: Management and Prevention

With advances in the understanding of elbow anatomy, pathologies of the elbow, arthroscopic instrumentation, and surgical techniques over recent decades, elbow arthroscopy has become a valuable treatment modality for a variety of conditions. Elbow arthroscopy has gained utility for treating problems such as septic arthritis, osteoarthritis, synovitis, osteophyte and loose body excision, contracture release, osteochondral defects, select fractures, instability, and lateral epicondylitis. Accordingly, precise knowledge of the neurovascular anatomy, safe arthroscopic portal placement, indications, and potential complications are required to maximize patient outcomes and assist in educating patients. This comprehensive review provides the reader an understanding of the potential complications associated with arthroscopic procedures of the elbow and to describe strategies for prevention and management.

A systematic review of elbow arthroscopy complications : Complications, risk factors, and safety tips

PURPOSE

To determine the complications from elbow arthroscopy for the past 16 years, and to summarize the most reported safety techniques and risk factors.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria included level I to IV evidence articles that were published after 2005 in the English language. Excluded were vet, paediatric, and cadaver studies. Open and arthroscopic-assisted elbow procedures were not included. Two online databases were comprehensively searched (PubMed and PMC) in April 2021. Relevant paper selection was conducted by two independent reviewers. MINORS score, demographic properties, indications, procedure type, complication rates, reoperation rates, reported risk factors, and safety techniques were recorded.

RESULTS

Fifty-two articles met the criteria and were included. No relevant level I to II evidence studies were discovered. The mean age ranged from 31 to 65 years. The average body mass indexes were between 26 and over 40 kg/m². There was a prevalence of male sex (from 50.2 to 79.2%). Most of the studies reported a minimum follow-up (range, 4 weeks-12 months). The most common arthroscopic procedure was debridement (up to 73% in Leong et al.'s study). The average MINORS score was 12 (range, 10-16). The total complications rate ranged from 1.5 to 11%, with a few studies reporting over 25%. Nerve injury rate was 1.26-7.5%. Re-operation rate ranged from none (100 procedures) to 11.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Elbow arthroscopy is a successful procedure with a low overall complications rate (from 1.5 to 11%), and a low nerve injury rate (from 1.26 to 7.5%). Risk factors include patient-related factors (obesity, female sex, age over 65 years, elevated blood sugar levels, hypercoagulable disorder, tobacco and alcohol use), preoperative elbow impairment/previous surgery, and periprocedural steroid injections. Our review discovered a re-operation rate of 2 to 18%.

Heterotopic Ossification After Arthroscopic Procedures: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Background:

Heterotopic ossification (HO) is the formation of bone in soft tissue resultant from inflammatory processes. Lesion formation after arthroscopic procedures is an uncommon but challenging complication. Optimal prophylaxis and management strategies have not been clearly defined.

Purpose:

To present a scoping review of the pathophysiology, risk factors, diagnostic modalities, prophylaxis recommendations, and current treatment practices concerning HO after arthroscopic management of orthopaedic injuries.

Study Design:

Scoping review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A scoping review via a PubMed search was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The search strategy was based on the terms “heterotopic ossification” AND “arthroscopy.” The clinical outcomes review included studies on the arthroscopic management of orthopaedic injuries in which the primary subject matter or a secondary outcome was the development of HO. An analysis of the pathophysiology, diagnostic modalities, and management options was reported.

Results:

A total of 43 studies (33,065 patients) reported on HO after hip arthroscopy, while 21 (83 patients) collectively reported on HO after arthroscopic procedures to the shoulder, elbow, knee, or ankle; however, management techniques were not standardized. Identified risk factors for HO included male sex and mixed impingement pathology, while intraoperative capsular management was not suggested as a contributing factor. Diagnosis of ossification foci was performed using radiography and computed tomography. The rate of HO after hip arthroscopy procedures approached 46% without prophylaxis, and administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) decreased occurrence rates to 4% but carries associated risks. External beam radiation has not been exclusively studied for use after arthroscopic procedures.

Conclusion:

HO is a known complication after arthroscopic management of orthopaedic injuries. NSAID prophylaxis has been demonstrated to be effective after hip arthroscopy procedures. Patients with persistent symptoms and mature lesions may be indicated for surgical excision, although variability is present in patient-reported outcome scores postoperatively.

Determining the incidence and risk factors for short-term complications following distal biceps tendon repair

Background

Distal biceps rupture is a relatively uncommon injury that can significantly affect quality of life. Early complications following biceps tendon repair are not well described in the literature. This study utilizes a national surgical database to determine the incidence of and predictors for short-term complications following distal biceps tendon repair.

Methods

The American College of Surgeons’ National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients undergoing distal biceps repair between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017. Patient demographic variables of sex, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, functional status, and several comorbidities were collected for each patient, along with 30-day postoperative complications. Binary logistic regression was used to calculate risk ratios for these complications using patient predictor variables.

Results

Early postoperative surgical complications (0.5%)—which were mostly infections (0.4%)—and medical complications (0.3%) were rare. A readmission risk factor was diabetes (risk ratio [RR], 4.238; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.180–15.218). Non-home discharge risk factors were smoking (RR, 3.006; 95% CI, 1.123–8.044) and ≥60 years of age (RR, 4.150; 95% CI, 1.611– 10.686). Maleness was protective for medical complications (RR, 0.024; 95% CI, 0.005–0.126). Surgical complication risk factors were obese class II (RR, 4.120; 95% CI, 1.123–15.120), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; RR, 21.981; 95% CI, 3.719–129.924), and inpatient surgery (RR, 8.606; 95% CI, 2.266–32.689).

Conclusions

Complication rates after distal biceps repair are low. Various patient demographics, medical comorbidities, and surgical factors were all predictive of short-term complications.

A Safe Interval between Preoperative Intra-articular Corticosteroid Injections and Subsequent Knee Arthroscopy

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the influence of intra-articular corticosteroid injections prior to knee arthroscopy on the rate of postoperative infection and define a safe timing interval between intra-articular corticosteroid injections and subsequent knee arthroscopy. The PearlDiver Database was used to identify patients who underwent a knee arthroscopy from 2007 to 2017. Patients were sorted into an injection cohort if they received any intra-articular corticosteroid injections within 6 months before surgery and a control cohort if they received no such injections. The injection cohort was then stratified into subgroups based on the timing of the most recent injection. We identified two types of postoperative infection in the 6 months following surgery: a broad definition of infection using knee infection diagnoses, and a narrow definition of infection requiring surgical treatment. The effects of the timing of preoperative corticosteroid injections on the rates of postoperative infection were investigated. The rate of broadly defined postoperative infection was significantly higher in the 0 to 2 weeks injection group (6.90%, 20/290) than the control group (2.01%, 1,449/72,089, p < 0.001; odds ratio [OR]:3.61 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.29, 5.70]). We observed a significant difference regarding the rate of narrowly defined postoperative infection requiring surgical treatment between the 0 and 2 weeks injection group (1.38%, 4/290) and the control group (0.27%, 192/72,089, p < 0.001, OR:5.24 [95% CI: 1.94, 14.21]). No significant differences were observed between other subgroups and the control group in both types of postoperative infection. Intra-articular corticosteroid injections within 2 weeks of knee arthroscopy were statistically significantly associated with higher rates of postoperative infection. This is a Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Pediatric elbow arthroscopy: clinical outcomes and complications after long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Elbow arthroscopy is becoming increasingly important for the treatment of a wide range of acute and chronic elbow pathologies. Even if elbow arthroscopy is technically demanding, in the pediatric population this minimally invasive technique is preferred by many surgeons for the treatment of pathologies such as osteochondritis dissecans (OCD), posttraumatic stiffness (PTS), or elbow posterior impingement (PI). The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes and safety of elbow arthroscopy in the pediatric and adolescent population after long-term follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, 26 patients younger than 18 years old undergoing elbow arthroscopy were evaluated. All surgeries were performed by a single senior surgeon. Patients were divided into three subgroups based on preoperative diagnosis: OCD, PTS, and PI. After at least 60 months follow-up, several outcome measures, including range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and visual analog scale (VAS) were evaluated in relation to preoperative values. The level of patient satisfaction on a five-level Likert scale, any limitation or change in sport activity, and the onset of any possible complications were also evaluated.

RESULTS

In the study population, we found an improvement in ROM (flexion of 14.4 ± 13.6°, extension of 19.5 ± 13.9°, pronation of 5.8 ± 5.7°, and supination of 8.5 ± 11.6°) and in validated outcome measures (MEPS of 21.0 ± 13.5 points and VAS of 3.8 ± 2.2 points). The satisfaction rate was 4.5, with no dissatisfaction. Eighty-seven percent of patients fully recovered their performance levels, 9% changed sport, and 4% were unable to return to sport. We identified one major and one minor complication, with an overall complication rate of 7.7%. No neurovascular injuries were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Elbow arthroscopy in a pediatric population can be considered an effective and safe procedure for selected pathologies when performed by an experienced surgeon. At long-term follow-up, we reported excellent clinical outcomes (both objective and subjective), with a relatively low complication rate without permanent injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-case series.

Nerve lesions during arthroscopic procedure: a literature overview

Arthroscopy is more and more popular. Although minimally-invasive, it's not completely free of complications as nerves lesions which can be invalidating for the patient and frustrating for the surgeon with significant economic, psychological and medico-legal implications. The purpose was to review the literature about nerve injuries related to arthroscopy. A scientific literature review was performed in PubMed/Medline, including articles dealing with cases of iatrogen lesions of the peripheral nerves occurred during arthroscopic procedures. These lesions are mainly due to direct damage by nerve section while cutting for making the portals or during surgical maneuvers, or indirect damage due to traction or pressure mechanisms especially for errors in patient positioning. Also the tourniquet can lead to compression and ischemic nerve injury. Arthroscopy can cause both transient and permanent neurological lesions manifested with dysesthesia up to paralysis according to Seddon's classification in neuroapraxia, axonotmesis and neurotmesis. Incidence of complications in general and of nerve injuries during arthroscopy are reported by joint. A rigorous respect for surgical technique and all perioperative precautions, particularly in relation to the positioning of the patient, greatly reduce the risk of nerve injury. The suggested waiting time before surgical nerve revision is 6 months. In the meanwhile the patient should perform physiotherapy constantly and improvements should be evaluated with clinical examination and electromyography 15-20 days after the lesion, and thereafter at 3 and 6 months.

Arthroscopic management of elbow stiffness

The elbow is particularly prone to stiffness. Loss of elbow motion is very limiting, and can be the result of trauma, primary osteoarthritis, heterotopic ossification and other conditions. Several exposures have been described for open elbow contracture release. Although a few decades ago elbow arthroscopy was considered only for diagnosis and removal of loose bodies, contemporary arthroscopic techniques allow successful management of the majority of conditions leading to elbow stiffness. Careful patient evaluation, use of advanced imaging studies, and acquisition of appropriate surgical skills are essential for the successful arthroscopic management of the stiff elbow. This expert opinion reviews some fundamentals of elbow stiffness as well as principles for the evaluation and arthroscopic management of the stiff elbow.

The Use of Elbow Arthroscopy for Management of the Pediatric Elbow: A Systematic Review of Indications and Outcomes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this review was to systematically examine the literature surrounding elbow arthroscopy for pediatric patients and to assess indications, functional outcomes, and complication rates.

METHODS

This systematic review was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE were searched for relevant literature from inception until December 2019, and studies were screened by 2 reviewers independently and in duplicate for those investigating elbow arthroscopy in a pediatric population (<18 years). Editorials, review articles, and case reports were excluded. Demographic data and data on surgical indications, treatment outcomes, and complications were recorded. A methodological quality assessment was performed for all included studies using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 studies, all of level IV evidence, were identified with a total of 492 patients (513 elbows). The patient population was 22.3% female with a mean age of 14.0 years (range, 4.0-15.7) and a mean follow-up time of 33.0 months (range, 7.4-96 months). Twelve studies (263 patients) exclusively recruited patients with osteochondritis dissecans (OCD), although other indications for elbow arthroscopy included arthrofibrosis (50 patients), elbow fracture (37 patients), medial ulnar collateral ligament injury (31 patients), and posterior impingement (17 patients). All 13 reporting studies showed a significant improvement in the elbow flexion-extension arc, and 4 of 5 that reported a functional outcome score before and after surgery demonstrating a significant improvement. Last, the overall complication rates ranged from 0% to 23.8%, with a total of 8 instances of neurological injury (5 ulnar, 2 radial, 1 unspecified), all being transient and resolving within 3 to 6 months.

CONCLUSION

Although elbow arthroscopy is primarily being performed for OCD in children and adolescents, there is evidence surrounding several other potential indications. Case series published to date have demonstrated significant improvements in functional outcomes and low rates of major complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of level IV studies.

Primary Elbow Osteoarthritis: Evaluation and Management

Most patients with primary osteoarthritis of the elbow report a history of heavy lifting with the affected upper extremity . Conservative treatment, including activity modifications, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the occasional intraarticular corticosteroid injection, may provide adequate pain relief in earlier stages . When surgery is required, and despite the presence of cartilage wear, many patients with primary elbow osteoarthritis experience substantial pain improvement with joint preserving procedures . The ulnar nerve needs to be carefully assessed and addressed at the time of surgery . Although open debridement procedures are effective, arthroscopic osteocapsular arthroplasty has emerged as the surgical procedure of choice . Total elbow arthroplasty is very successful in terms of pain relief and function, but it is reserved for patients with end-stage osteoarthritis who are relatively older and have failed joint preserving procedures.

Does Sawbone-Based Arthroscopy Module (SBAM) Can Help Elbow Surgeons?

INTRODUCTION

The use of elbow arthroscopy is becoming increasingly common in orthopaedic practice; nevertheless, it is still considered a difficult procedure with a long learning curve. The aim of the study is to evaluate the role of a new elbow Sawbone-Based Arthroscopy Module (e-SBAM) in the training of elbow surgeons.

METHODS

Fourteen surgeons were classified as "Expert" (n: 7; more than 10 years of experience in arthroscopic surgery) and "Not-expert" surgeons (n: 7; less than 10 years of experience). During a dedicated arthroscopic session, using the Sawbones Elbow model (Sawbones Europe AB®), all participants were asked to perform an arthroscopic round and to touch three specific landmarks. An independent observer measured the time that each participant needed to perform this task (Performance 1). The same measurement was repeated after two weeks of eSBAM training (Performance 2).

RESULTS

"Not-expert" surgeons needed significantly more time (41 s; range 26-120) than "Expert" ones (13 s; range 8-36) to complete Performance 1. One "Not-expert" surgeon did not complete Performance 1 and needed more than 120 s for Performance 2. The whole study group required a median of 5 s less to complete Performance 2. A tendency towards an improvement was observed in the group of the non-experienced surgeons as compared with the experienced ones.

CONCLUSIONS

The simulation training can be advantageous in the learning curve of young elbow surgeons and helpful for experienced surgeons. E-SBAM can be used as an effective tool for the current stepwise arthroscopic elbow training programs with the aim of improving arthroscopic elbow skills.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Basic Science Study.

A Systematic Review of Arthroscopic Versus Open Debridement of the Arthritic Elbow

PURPOSE

To systematically review the available data with regard to clinical and functional outcomes of arthroscopic and open debridement for elbow arthritis to determine the complication rate with transition to arthroscopic surgery.

METHODS

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses protocol, a systematic review was performed including studies reporting clinical and functional outcomes following open or arthroscopic debridement of elbow arthritis. The primary outcome measures analyzed were functional outcome (Mayo Elbow Performance Score), range of motion, and complication rate. Data were extracted for the whole group and then compared between the techniques using ranges and forest plots.

RESULTS

In total, 39 level IV and 3 level III studies with 1097 elbows were eligible for inclusion; 684 elbows were treated using an open technique and 413 using an arthroscopic technique. Regarding functional outcome scores, mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved significantly with comparable magnitude of improvement in both groups (arthroscopic group: range 28-34, open group: range 25-31). Regarding range of motion, mean flexion-extension arc improved significantly in both groups (arthroscopic group: range 8-26°, open group: range 13-49°). The open group had a lower preoperative flexion-extension arc (range 63-96) in comparison with the arthroscopic group (range 84-119). The overall incidence of complications was 5.7% (range 0%-19%) in the arthroscopic group and 6.1% (range 0%-25%) in the open group. The most common complication type was neurologic, with an incidence of 2.1% (range 0%-8%) in the arthroscopic group and 1.9% (range 0%-12%) in the open group. The deep infection rate was 0.7% (range 0%-10%) in the open group with no reported incidence in the arthroscopic group.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrated good mid-term functional outcomes following debridement arthroplasty of the arthritic elbow. There was no increase in complications with an arthroscopic technique confirming its safety and efficacy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, Systematic Review of Level III and IV articles.

Heterotopic Ossification after Arthroscopic Elbow Release

Objectives

To evaluate the incidence and risk factors of heterotopic ossification (HO) after arthroscopic elbow release.

Methods

The present study included 101 elbows, with arthroscopic release performed on 98 patients over the 5‐year period from November 2011 to December 2015. Patients were divided into three groups: group 1, with elbow arthritis, including 46 elbows in 43 patients; group 2, with posttraumatic extrinsic elbow stiffness (without intraarticular adhesion), including 23 elbows in 23 patients; and group 3, with intrinsic contractures (with intraarticular adhesion), including 32 elbows in 32 patients. Arthroscopic elbow release was performed under general anesthesia. For intrinsic stiffness, a radiofrequency device was applied to release intraarticular scar tissue and create work space, which was rarely necessary in groups 1 and 2. In the postoperative period, X‐rays and CT scans were assessed at follow up to determine if there was HO formation, which was diagnosed when new calcifications were identified. The functional recovery was evaluated by comparing the range of motion (ROM) and pain relief preoperativley and postoperatively in each group. Other complications were also assessed postoperatively.

Results

The patients’ mean age was 38.6 years (range, 12–66), with 57 males and 41 females. Mean follow‐up was 21 months (range, 4–56). The active ROM and Mayo elbow performance index (MEPS) were improved from 93° ± 8.3° to 126° ± 12.4° (P < 0.05) and 71.4 ± 7.6 to 91.3 ± 8.7 (P < 0.001) in group 1, 66° ± 10.3° to 121° ± 10.7° (P < 0.005) and 65.6 ± 9.2 to 93.5 ± 11.2 (P < 0.05) in group 2, and 46° ± 6.7° to 91° ± 11.1° (P < 0.001) and 52.3 ± 6.4 to 80.6 ± 9.4 (P < 0.005) in group 3. HO developed in 25/101 cases (25%) and 4 patients with severe cases underwent repeat surgery. Those in group 1 were primarily arthritis patients; there were 3 out 46 cases with minor HO evident on X‐ray. In group 2, 1/23 had minor HO. In group 3, 21/32 patients had HO; 4 cases were considered severe, 4 were considered moderate, and 13 were considered minor. The average flexion–extension arc was improved by 47° at the last follow up. Other postoperative complications included 8 cases of prolonged drainage from portal sites, 17 transient nerve palsies, 1 permanent radial nerve injury, and 1 patient who developed delayed‐onset ulnar neuritis. This patient was fully recovered 5 months after surgery.

Conclusions

The high incidence of HO formation after arthroscopic elbow release may relate to improper application of a radiofrequency device. Minimizing thermal injury from these radiofrequency devices could reduce HO formation and improve postoperative functional recovery.

Diagnostic and Therapeutic Elbow Arthroscopy Using Small-Bore Needle Arthroscopy

Needle arthroscopy may provide several potential advantages over standard arthroscopy. The smaller camera size and weight allows for a minimally invasive and percutaneous approach with decreased fluid use. As resolution and image quality improve, the potential to expand clinical use for therapeutic applications becomes possible. One promising use is in elbow arthroscopy. Difference in the technology, such as a zero-degree optic and less-rigid instrumentation, necessitate a modified technique to accommodate thorough diagnostic arthroscopy and therapeutic procedures. This manuscript introduces the authors' approach to diagnostic needle arthroscopy of the anterior and posterior elbow compartments and placement of therapeutic instrumentation. This technique could theoretically decrease the risk of iatrogenic neurovascular injuries, reduce postoperative swelling and pain due to decreased fluid use, and potentially lead to faster recovery.

Modified Lateral Approach of the Elbow for Surgical Release and Synovectomy

Elbow stiffness is a common reason for consultation. In recent years, arthroscopic techniques in elbow surgery have progressed, but there are still some contraindications to performance of arthroscopic synovectomy and release in this joint (elbows with anatomic deformity after multiple procedures, malunion, presence of osteosynthesis material, severe stiffness of >80 degrees, instability, or previous transposition of the ulnar nerve). Therefore, knowledge of a safe and reliable open approach to achieve elbow release and/or synovectomy is essential. We report the technical details of the modified lateral approach between extensor carpi radialis brevis and longus muscles, as well as the clinical results of 43 elbow release and/or synovectomy procedures, illustrating its feasibility. The modified lateral approach, providing visual control of the radial nerve and good anterior exposure of the elbow joint, is detailed. From 1994 to 2016, this approach was used in 43 release and/or synovectomy procedures of the elbow in 41 patients, 30 men and 11 women, with a mean age of 40.56 years (range, 17 to 84 y). Using this procedure, 38 elbows (93%) recovered full extension and 5 subtotal extension with an average deficit of 11 degrees (range, 5 to 20 degrees). All elbows were stable. No neurological complications were reported. The modified lateral approach preserves the insertion of the lateral epicondyle muscles that are major dynamic stabilizers and reduces the risk of instability. Initially described for the treatment of radial tunnel syndrome, it should also be recommended for elbow release and synovectomy.

Preoperative Opioid Prescription Filling Is a Risk Factor for Prolonged Opioid Use After Elbow Arthroscopy

PURPOSE

To (1) report the frequency of postoperative opioid prescriptions after elbow arthroscopy, (2) evaluate whether filling opioid prescriptions preoperatively placed patients at increased risk of requiring more opioid prescriptions after surgery, and (3) determine patient factors associated with postoperative opioid prescription needs.

METHODS

A national claims-based database was queried for patients undergoing primary elbow arthroscopy. Patients with prior total elbow arthroplasty or septic arthritis of the elbow were excluded. Patients who filled at least 1 opioid prescription between 1 and 4 months prior to surgery were defined as the preoperative opioid-use group. Monthly relative risk ratios for filling an opioid prescription were calculated for the first year after surgery. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with opioid use at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after elbow arthroscopy, with P < .05 defined as significant.

RESULTS

We identified 1,138 patients who underwent primary elbow arthroscopy. The preoperative opioid-use group consisted of 245 patients (21.5%), 61 of whom (24.9%) were still filling opioid prescriptions 12 months after surgery. The multivariate analysis determined that the preoperative opioid-use group was at increased risk of postoperative opioid prescription filling at 3 months (odds ratio [OR], 9.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.98-13.76), 6 months (OR, 8.74; 95% CI, 5.57-13.92), 9 months (OR, 7.17; 95% CI, 4.57-11.39), and 12 months (OR, 6.27; 95% CI, 3.94-10.07) after elbow arthroscopy. Patients younger than 40 years exhibited a decreased risk of postoperative opioid prescription filling at 3 months (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25-0.91), 6 months (OR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.06-0.50), 9 months (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.22-0.97), and 12 months (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.19-0.94) after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative opioid filling, fibromyalgia, and psychiatric illness are associated with an increased risk of prolonged postoperative opioid after elbow arthroscopy. Patient age younger than 40 years and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are associated with a decreased risk of postoperative opioid prescription filling within the first postoperative year.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Arthroscopic localization of the ulnar nerve behind the medial capsule is unreliable

Purpose

Ulnar nerve injury is the most common neurologic complication of elbow arthroscopy. The purpose of this cadaveric study was to quantify the ability of surgeons to locate the ulnar nerve behind the posteromedial capsule during elbow arthroscopy using sole arthroscopic vision.

Methods

Twenty-one surgeons were asked to pin the ulnar nerve at the medial gutter and the posteromedial compartment using arthroscopic visualization of the medial capsule only. Pinning of the ulnar nerve was performed from extra-articular. Then, the cadaveric specimens were dissected and the shortest distances between the pins and ulnar nerve measured.

Results

Median pin-to-nerve distances at the medial gutter and posteromedial compartment were 0 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 0-3 mm) and 2 mm (IQR, 0-6 mm), respectively. The ulnar nerve was pinned by 11/21 surgeons (52%) at the medial gutter, and 7/21 surgeons (33%) at the posteromedial compartment. Three of 21 surgeons (14%) pinned the ulnar nerve at both the medial gutter and the posteromedial compartment. Surgeon's experience and operation volume did not affect these outcomes (P > .05).

Conclusions

Surgeons' ability to locate the ulnar nerve behind the posteromedial capsule using sole arthroscopic visualization, without external palpation, is poor. We recommend to proceed carefully when performing arthroscopic procedures in the posteromedial elbow, and identify and mobilize the ulnar nerve prior to any posteromedial capsular procedures.

Neurologic complications after surgical management of complex elbow trauma requiring radial head replacement

BACKGROUND

Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) has become a successful procedure for addressing acute unreconstructible radial head fractures that compromise elbow stability in complex elbow trauma. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of and risk factors for the development of neurologic complications after surgical treatment of complex elbow fractures that require an RHA.

METHODS

Sixty-two patients with an unreconstructible radial head fracture and complex elbow instability treated with RHA were included. There were 33 men and 29 women, with a mean age of 54 years (range, 22-87 years). The average follow-up period was 5.2 years (range, 3-16 years). All patients were neurologically intact before surgery. The arthroplasty was implanted through a Kocher approach in 55 cases, whereas a Kaplan approach was used in 7. An uncemented smooth stem arthroplasty (Evolve) was used in 27 patients, and an anatomic ingrowth system (Anatomic Radial Head), in 35. At the time of surgery, 23 patients underwent fixation of a coronoid fracture and 15 underwent plating of the proximal ulna. All patients were clinically examined immediately after surgery and during follow-up to detect any degree of neurologic deficit. Radial and ulnar nerve injuries were classified according to the Hirachi and McGowan classifications, respectively. Functional outcomes were evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score.

RESULTS

A complete posterior interosseous nerve palsy occurred postoperatively in 2 patients. Hand function had completely recovered in both at 2 months after surgery without sequelae. Nine patients complained of ulnar nerve symptoms (immediately after surgery in 6 and as delayed ulnar neuropathy in 3). Most patients with ulnar nerve deficits had undergone additional surgical procedures to address ulnar fractures. Among patients with ulnar neuropathies, only 3 complained of mild sensory symptoms at the latest follow-up. No significant differences in range of motion and Mayo Elbow Performance Score were found between patients with and without neurologic complications. Associated olecranon or coronoid fixation and a prolonged tourniquet time were identified as risk factors for neurologic complications.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the incidence of neurologic complications associated with the surgical treatment of complex elbow fractures requiring implantation of a radial head prosthesis may be underestimated in the literature. Inappropriate retraction in the anterior aspect of the radial neck, a prolonged ischemia time, and concomitant coronoid or olecranon fracture fixation represent the main risk factors for the development of this complication. Although the great majority of patients have full recovery of their nerve function, they should be advised on the risk of this stressful complication.

Editorial Commentary: Elbow Arthroscopy Is a Safe Procedure. Sure

Elbow arthroscopy is a procedure that is of great potential use and yet also of grave potential risks. To balance the risk-versus-reward consideration, one must be aware of the potential complications associated with this procedure, weigh them against the potential advantages, and understand one's own skills and familiarity with the procedure. There is no doubt that elbow arthroscopy has changed and even revolutionized our management of pathology about the elbow; however, one must bear in mind that this comes at a risk of complications that cannot be reduced to zero.

Complications of Elbow Arthroscopy in a Community-Based Practice

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to report the complications of elbow arthroscopy in a large community practice with multiple surgeons and to analyze potential risk factors for these complications.

METHODS

Patient demographic information, surgical variables, surgeon variables, and complications were retrospectively reviewed for all elbow arthroscopies performed within the health network from 2006 to 2014. Inclusion criteria included patients of any age undergoing a primary and revision elbow arthroscopy, which may have been performed in conjunction with other procedures. Exclusion criteria included incorrectly coded procedures where arthroscopy was not performed and no postoperative follow-up. Statistical calculations were performed using a binary logistic regression analysis to fit a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

560 consecutive elbow arthroscopies in 528 patients performed between 2006 and 2014, by 42 surgeons at 14 facilities, were reviewed. 113 procedures were performed in pediatric patients under the age of 18. The average age was 38.6 years (range: 5-88). There were 444 males. The average length of follow-up was 375.8 days (2 to 2,739 days). Overall, heterotopic ossification occurred in 14 of 560 cases (2.5%) (all males), and 20 of 560 (3.5%) cases developed transient nerve palsies (8 ulnar, 8 radial, 1 median, 3 medial antebrachial cutaneous). There were 3 (0.5%) deep and 11 (2%) superficial infections. There were no vascular injuries, compartment syndrome, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism. Elevated blood sugar was a significantly higher risk for infection (odds ratio [OR] 4.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.337 to 12.645; P = .0136). Previous elbow surgery (OR 3.57, 95% CI 1.440 to 8.938; P = .006) and female sex (OR 4.05; 95% CI 1.642 to 9.970; P = .002) had a significantly higher risk for nerve injury. Relative to pediatric patients, there were higher odds in adults for nerve injury, infection, and heterotopic ossification, but none reached significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Elbow arthroscopy is a safe procedure with low complication rates. Diabetes is a risk factor for infection. Prior surgery and female sex are risk factors for nerve injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Case series, level 4.

Preoperative corticosteroid joint injections within 2 weeks of shoulder arthroscopies increase postoperative infection risk

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus regarding the safe timing interval between corticosteroid shoulder injections and future shoulder arthroscopies. Our study assessed the relationship between preoperative corticosteroid injection timing and shoulder arthroscopy infectious outcomes.

METHODS

We used an insurance database to identify and sort all shoulder arthroscopy patients by corticosteroid shoulder injection history within 6 months before surgery. Patients who received injections were stratified by the timing of their most recent preoperative injection. The overall infection rate and rate of severe infections requiring treatment through intravenous antibiotics or surgical débridement in the 6-month postoperative period were compared using χ² tests between the injection cohorts and a control group of patients defined as those with no injection history.

RESULTS

We identified 50,478 shoulder arthroscopy patients, of whom 4115 received injections in the 6-month preoperative period. We found a significant increase in both the overall infection rate (P < .0001) and severe infection rate (P < .0001) in patients who received injections within 2 weeks before surgery (n = 79; 8.86% and 6.33%, respectively) compared with those who received no injections in the 6-month preoperative period (n = 46,363; 1.56% and 0.55%, respectively). No other significant differences were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that in patients who have received corticosteroid injections, shoulder arthroscopic procedures may be safely performed after at least 2 weeks has passed since the most recent injection to minimize the risk of postoperative infection. In addition, procedures performed within 2 weeks of an injection may increase the risk of postoperative infection.

Arthroscopically-assisted fixation of anteromedial coronoid facet fracture and lateral ulnar collateral ligament repair for acute posteromedial rotatory fracture dislocation of the elbow

If left untreated, varus posteromedial rotatory injuries of the elbow result in poor functional outcomes. Surgical treatment allows restoration of elbow kinematics, minimizing the chances of chronic varus instability and early onset osteoarthritis. However, large exposures are associated with extensive soft tissue stripping, a high risk of infection, nerve injury, poor visualization of the articular surface and longer recovery. Consequently, there has been renewed interest in the use of elbow arthroscopy to circumvent these problems. Arthroscopic treatment offers the potential advantage of a swift recovery, with instant rehabilitation, less stiffness and swelling than might be expected after open repair. We present the first combined arthroscopic-assisted anteromedial facet coronoid fracture fixation and lateral ulna collateral ligament repair in a varus posteromedial rotatory injury of the elbow.

A novel transverse ultrasonography technique for minimally displaced lateral humeral condyle fractures in children

INTRODUCTION

Management of minimally displaced lateral humeral condyle fractures in pediatric patients is controversial. This is primarily because with current imaging modalities it is difficult to accurately and conveniently determine the stability of the fractures by detecting the integrity of the cartilage hinge. Nevertheless, transverse ultrasonography has not been intensively reported in previous studies.

HYPOTHESIS

Transverse ultrasonography can determine the integrity of the cartilage hinge in minimally displaced lateral condyle fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 39 pediatric patients with minimally displaced fractures of the lateral humeral condyle who underwent transverse ultrasonography between 2014 and 2017. Conservative treatment was given to pediatric patients with intact cartilage hinges that had been confirmed by transverse ultrasound images. Surgical treatment was recommended for pediatric patients with disrupted cartilage hinges. Data regarding healing of the lateral humeral condyle fractures were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

According to transverse ultrasonography, there were 14 children with intact cartilage hinges and 25 children with disrupted cartilage hinges. Fourteen children with intact cartilage hinges of the fracture were treated conservatively, and none of them showed secondary displacement. There were 16 children in whom there was surgical intervention, and 9 other children decided to have conservative treatment among the 25 children with disruption of the cartilage hinge. Five of these 9 children who underwent conservative treatment were found to have further displacement during an average of 12.6 days after the fracture event, and no other patient was found to have further displacement.

CONCLUSION

Transverse ultrasonography can simply and accurately determine the stability of minimally displaced lateral condyle fractures without sedation, ionizing radiation or invasive techniques. We recommend routine use of transverse ultrasonography to detect stability of the fractures, which can effectively avoid inadequate treatment and unnecessary surgery in pediatric patients with minimally displaced fractures of the lateral humeral condyle.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective cohort study.

The posterior interosseous nerve crosses the radial head midline and increases its distance from bony structures with supination of the forearm

BACKGROUND

This study investigated whether forearm movements change the relative position of the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) with respect to the midline of the radial head (Rh) under direct arthroscopic observation.

METHODS

The PIN was identified in 10 fresh frozen cadaveric specimens dissected under arthroscopy. The forearm was moved first in full pronation and then in full supination, and the displacement of the PIN from medial to lateral with respect to the midline of the Rh was recorded. The shortest linear distance between the nerve and the most anterior part of the Rh was measured with a graduated calliper inserted via the midlateral portal with the forearm in neutral position, full pronation, and full supination.

RESULTS

The PIN was identifiable in all specimens. In all cases the PIN crossed the Rh midline with forearm movements, moving from medial in full pronation to lateral in full supination. The distance between the PIN and Rh is significantly greater in supination than in the neutral position and pronation (P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that the PIN movement described in open surgery (medialization with pronation) also occurs during arthroscopy. The role of pronation in protecting the PIN in extra-articularprocedures is therefore confirmed. Supination, however, increases the linear distance between the PIN and Rh and should therefore be considered to increase the safe working volume whenever intra-articular procedures are performed on the anterolateral aspect of the elbow.

Locating the ulnar nerve during elbow arthroscopy using palpation is only accurate proximal to the medial epicondyle

PURPOSE

Knowledge of ulnar nerve position is of utmost importance to avoid iatrogenic injury in elbow arthroscopy. The aim of this study was to determine how accurate surgeons are in locating the ulnar nerve after fluid extravasation has already occurred, and basing their localization solely on palpation of anatomical landmarks.

METHODS

Seven cadaveric elbows were used and seven experienced surgeons in elbow arthroscopy participated. An arthroscopic setting was simulated and fluids were pumped into the joint from the posterior compartment for 15 min. For each cadaveric elbow, one surgeon was asked to locate the ulnar nerve solely by palpation of the anatomical landmarks, and subsequently pin the ulnar nerve at two positions: within 5 cm proximal and another within 5 cm distal of a line connecting the medial epicondyle and the tip of the olecranon. Subsequently, the elbows were dissected using a standard medial elbow approach and the distances between the pins and ulnar nerve were measured.

RESULTS

The median distance between the ulnar nerve and the proximal pins was 0 mm (range 0-0 mm), and between the ulnar nerve and the distal pins was 2 mm (range 0-10 mm), showing a statistically significant difference (p = 0.009). All seven proximally placed pins (100%) transfixed the ulnar nerve versus two out of seven distally placed pins (29%) (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

In a setting simulating an already initiated arthroscopic procedure, the sole palpation of the anatomical landmarks allows experienced elbow surgeons to accurately locate the ulnar nerve only in its course proximal to the medial epicondyle (7/7, 100%), whereas a significantly reduced accuracy is documented when the same surgeons attempt to locate the nerve distal to the medial epicondyle (2/7, 29%; p = 0.021). Current findings support the establishment of a proximal anteromedial portal over a distal anteromedial portal to access the anterior compartment after tissue extravasation has occurred with regard to ulnar nerve safety.

Classification of the transverse pattern of Mason II radial head fractures and its usefulness in arthroscopic osteosynthesis. Anatomo-surgical study

OBJECTIVE

The management of MasonII fracture pattern assisted by arthroscopy is a valid technique that provides good results. The objective of this study was to draw attention to the usefulness of the location of the fracture in the head of the radius in defined quadrants with respect to the bicipital tuberosity through CT. This would help to plan the optimal forearm position to access each quadrant and foresee the specific difficulties of each one.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We dissected 4 specimens of cryopreserved cadaver. We divided the radial head into 4 quadrants with regard to the bicipital tuberosity, objectifying the change of position in pronation and maximum supination with respect to the sigmoid cavity and neurovascular structures.

RESULTS

The head of the radio moves with pronosupination, so there are areas of convergence between the different quadrants. Quadrant1 is approached in supination via an anteromedial portal. Quadrant2 is approached in maximum pronation through a lateral portal. Quadrant3 can be approached through lateral portals, with the forearm in neutral position and in pronation. Quadrant4 is accessible with the forearm in a neutral position and in supination through a lateral portal.

CONCLUSIONS

Depending on the location of the fracture in the head of the radius with respect to the bicipital tuberosity, we will need access through a specific arthroscopic portal, with the medial quadrants (anteromedial and posteromedial) being the most technically demanding.

Outcomes and factors of elbow arthroscopy upon returning to sports for throwing athletes with osteoarthritis

Background

Elbow arthroscopy had good functional outcome for throwing athletes. Returning to sports is a major concern for all athletes, but only a few reports have investigated the clinical factors related to the duration of returning to sports. The present study evaluates the efficacy of elbow arthroscopic surgery on throwing elbows with osteoarthritis and defines the clinical factors related to the duration of the returning to sports.

Methods

This was a retrospective study with fifteen active baseball throwing athletes with elbow osteoarthritis who were treated with elbow arthroscopy. Perioperative clinical factors were analyzed for functional outcomes. A multiple linear regression analysis was used to analyze the clinical factors associated with the duration of returning to training and sports.

Results

The 15 patients’ mean age was 27 years. The mean follow-up time was 2.6 years. The mean procedural complexity was 3.1 ± 1.6 (range 1–6). The elbow total range of motion (ROM) improved significantly from 100.7 ± 28.7° to 125.7 ± 18.5° (p = 0.001). The terminal flexion range of the elbow increased significantly from 116.0 ± 22.6° to 130.0 ± 13.2° (p = 0.001), and the terminal extension range improved from 15.3 ± 11.1° to 4.3 ± 5.9° (p = 0.001). Before the operation, the average subjective patient outcome for return to sports (SPORTS) score was 3.4 ± 1.5, which increased significantly to 9.67 ± 0.45 (p = 0.003) at the last follow-up. The multiple linear regression analysis revealed that higher procedural complexity hinders the athletes from returning to competition.

Conclusions

Elbow arthroscopy offered highly satisfactory results in the throwing elbows of elite athletes and significantly improved the range of motion and SPORTS score. The procedural complexity was significantly related to the duration of returning to competition. Early and aggressive arthroscopic intervention is recommended for elite throwing athletes with elbow osteoarthritis who fail to respond to conservative treatment.

Prospective outcome assessment of arthroscopic arthrolysis for traumatic and degenerative elbow contracture

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopic elbow release for both traumatic and degenerative contractures from intraoperative recording through the recovery time until final follow-up.

METHODS

The study is based on 54 consecutive patients with extrinsic elbow contracture (traumatic in 31 and degenerative in 23) treated with arthroscopic arthrolysis by a single surgeon in 2011-2015. Range of motion (ROM) and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) were recorded preoperatively; intraoperatively; following release; and in the 1st, 3rd, 8th, 12th, and 26th weeks and at 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

Significant improvements were noted in extension, flexion, and range of motion, measured both intraoperatively and at all follow-up visits. The greatest improvement in the range of motion was achieved at the time of surgery (from 89° ± 28° to 131° ± 14°, P < .001); it then decreased at 1 week to 103° ± 22° (P < .001) and slowly recovered to reach 124° ± 22° after 2 years. This was better than the preoperative value (P < .001) but worse than the intraoperative value (P = .002). A similar pattern was observed in both traumatic and degenerative contractures. The MEPS improved from 73 ± 12 preoperatively to 93 ± 14 at the final evaluation (P < .001). The ROM and MEPS results at every follow-up were comparable for both traumatic and degenerative contractures. ROM improved regardless of the severity of contracture.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis was similarly efficient in ROM restoration in both traumatic and degenerative contractures and regardless of the severity of contracture. After early deterioration, the achieved gain slowly recovers over a period of 6 months but may not recover to the ranges achieved during arthroscopy.

Arthroscopic debridement for primary elbow osteoarthritis with and without capsulectomy: a comparative cohort study

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic elbow debridement for primary osteoarthritis may be performed with or without a joint capsulectomy. The purpose of this comparative cohort study was to compare range of motion (ROM) and early complications between patients with and without anterior capsulectomy.

METHODS

In total, 110 patients with primary osteoarthritis of the elbow who underwent an arthroscopic debridement for primary osteoarthritis were reviewed with a minimum of 3 months postoperative follow-up. The first group consisted of 51 patients who had a concomitant capsulectomy and the second group consisted of 59 patients who either had a capsulotomy or did not have the capsule addressed.

RESULTS

There was significantly greater pre-operative stiffness in the group who had an anterior capsulectomy versus those who did not. A greater improvement in arc of ROM occurred in patients who had a concomitant capsulectomy compared to patients without (24° versus 12°) (p < 0.003); however, there were no significant differences in final ROM between groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of complications between the groups (16% capsulectomy versus 18% no capsulectomy).

CONCLUSIONS

Elbow arthroscopy and debridement for primary elbow osteoarthritis yields satisfactory motion at short-term follow-up with or without a capsulectomy. The incidence of early complications was low at this tertiary referral centre, with no significant differences between groups.

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.

Proper elbow arthroscopy portal placement in pediatric and adolescent patients

We sought to evaluate proper elbow arthroscopy portal placement in pediatric and adolescent patients. Overall, 109 pediatric and adolescent patients who underwent elbow arthrography were included. Condylar width was measured and the proximal anterior joint capsule location was determined using the ulna-capsular distance. Condylar width and Bone mass index(BMI) also had a high positive correlation coefficient with the proximal joint capsule location. Proximal ulnar border is recommended new bony landmark in pediatric and adolescent patients who undergo elbow arthroscopy. In particular, condylar width and BMI were found to have a high positive correlation with the proximal joint capsule location.