Arthroscopic treatment of post-traumatic elbow contracture

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.

Arthroscopic Capsular Release for Post-traumatic Elbow Stiffness

BACKGROUND

Post-traumatic elbow stiffness (PTES) may substantially affect the patient's functional range of motion and quality of life. Open elbow release has been extensively studied, but arthroscopic techniques are limited, particularly in differentiating between post-traumatic and non-traumatic stiffness. The purpose of this study is to assess the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic release of PTES regarding the range of motion (ROM), pain, functional assessment, and complications.

METHODS

A prospective cohort was conducted on adult patients who underwent arthroscopic arthrolysis for PTES, with 32 patients included in the final analysis. The ROM was measured using the orthopedic goniometer. Grip strength was measured using the Camry digital hand dynamometer (Camry, CA, USA) and compared to their contralateral side. The functional status of the patients was evaluated using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES)andthe Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI). All measurements were done before surgery and at the last follow-up visit. Pre-operative and post-operative changes in MEPI, ASES, and visual analog (VAS) scores were compared with the paired t-test.

RESULTS

After surgery, the ROM significantly improved from 74 ± 11 to 110 ± 15 degrees (p<0.001). Additionally, the ASES score and MEPI index both significantly improved from 69 ± 3.4 to 79 ± 6.3 and from 64 ± 5.7 to 82 ± 8, respectively (p<0.001). VAS scores also significantly improved from 1.1 ± 0.87 to 0.31 ± 0.53 at rest (p<0.001). The complication rate was 12%, including three transient ulnar nerve paresthesia and one superficial infection. Post-traumatic elbow release was more offered in distal humerus fractures (53%), followed by proximal ulna fracture/dislocations (25%).

CONCLUSION

We believe that arthroscopic arthrolysis is a safe and reliable treatment of PTES, which improves joint visibility and reduces pain. Patients can be counseled regarding the risk of a secondary surgery following distal humerus or proximal ulna fractures, including the expected recovery and complication rate.

Incidence of Repeat Elbow Capsular Release After Arthroscopic Elbow Capsular Release

Background

Elbow capsular release can be performed arthroscopically or through an open method to improve range of motion (ROM). However, it is unclear how frequently patients require an open capsular release after unsatisfactory results from an arthroscopic release.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to determine the percentage of patients who underwent an arthroscopic elbow release for loss of motion who then required a repeat elbow capsular release or other subsequent surgery on the same elbow. It was hypothesized that patients who underwent arthroscopic elbow release would rarely (<5%) require a subsequent elbow release.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

Patients who underwent arthroscopic elbow capsular release from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, were identified by chart review and procedure code. Demographic parameters, pre- and postoperative ROM, and surgical history were collected by chart review. Follow-up data included patient satisfaction and the Timmerman-Andrews (TA) elbow score. Data were compared between patients who did and those who did not require subsequent elbow surgery.

Results

Overall, of 140 study patients (116 male, 24 female; mean age, 49.6 years), 18 (12.9%) required subsequent surgery, including 6 capsular releases (4.3%; 1 open and 5 arthroscopic). The most common follow-up procedure was ulnar nerve releases/transpositions (n = 7). Total arc of elbow motion (flexion to extension) improved by a mean of 51.4°. The mean TA score was 76.5 ± 20.4 at a mean of 5.25 years postoperatively. Mean satisfaction score was 77.6 ± 26.3. In this study, 82.4% of patients stated that their symptoms either improved or resolved completely. Patients who required subsequent surgery had a significantly lower preoperative total arc of elbow motion versus those who did not require subsequent surgery (P = .046). There was no difference between the groups in symptom resolution, satisfaction, ROM, or TA score (P ≥ .279 for all).

Conclusion

After arthroscopic elbow release, <5% of patients required a repeat elbow capsular release, 12.9% required some form of follow-up elbow surgery, and 4.3% had a new injury of the elbow. Overall, patients saw improvement in elbow ROM, but many still had residual symptoms from their underlying disease after arthroscopic elbow capsular release.

[Treatment of lateral and medial epicondylopathy : Are platelet-rich plasma, shock wave therapy, etc. effective for both?]

Lateral and medial epicondylopathy (epicondylitis), which are common and in most cases self-limiting, frequently result in relevant reduction of quality of life and may also affect the ability to work. Recently, the use of orthobiologics, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), has been proposed to promote tendon regeneration and is supposed to be a valuable treatment option. However, scientific data are conflicting and the short- and long-time results are controversial. The use of stem cells is new approach and preliminary clinical data are promising. Shock wave therapy is widely used and part of the daily routine in treating lateral epicondylopoathy, although it is questionable for medial epicondylopathy.

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.

A Surgical Protocol for Management of Post Traumatic Heterotopic Ossification of Elbow

BACKGROUND

Open excision remains the gold standard of treatment for posttraumatic heterotopic ossification (HO) of the elbow. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the functional outcome of early surgical excision done by adhering to a proposed surgical protocol with exclusive posttraumatic HO of the elbow.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted with 31 patients (25 males and 6 females) with a mean follow-up of 40.5 ± 27.44 months. Excision was done according to our surgical protocol based on the location of HO, associated fractures, stability, need for ulnar nerve transposition, previous operative scar. Improvement in elbow function, Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS) preoperatively and at final follow-up was compared, and statistical analysis was done.

RESULTS

Mean flexion-extension arc, supination-pronation arc and MEPS improved by 74.68° ± 29.32°, 26.13° ± 32.93°, 30.48 ± 11.57, respectively. Flexion arc deteriorated by 10.81° ± 10.42° from intraoperative to final follow-up. Improvement at final follow-up was significant in all the cases (P < 0.05). 19 patients had limited HO, and 12 had global HO. Their mean flexion-extension arc increase was 77.63° ± 29.12° and 70° ± 30.3° respectively, and the final mean MEPS score was 96.05 ± 5.16 and 88.75 ± 11.51, respectively. Nine patients had no initial fracture (Group 1), 13 had some fracture (Group 2), nine had a fracture-dislocation of the elbow (Group 3). Their flexion-extension improvement, final MEPS were 88.33° ± 30.82°, 98.33 ± 5, (Group 1); 81.15° ± 16.73°, 92.31 ± 9.27 (Group 2) and 51.67° ± 31.32°, 89.44 ± 9.5 (Group 3), respectively. We had two complications (6.45%).

CONCLUSION

The surgical protocol described here enabled us to achieve good functional results and was in concordance with similar studies done previously.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-021-00381-x.

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.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Posttraumatic Elbow Stiffness Due to Soft Tissue Problems

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of arthroscopic management of posttraumatic elbow stiffness due to soft tissue problems.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 30 consecutive arthroscopic elbow releases for posttraumatic stiff elbow from November 2011 to December 2019 was conducted. Stiff elbows with bony problems, such as heterotopic ossification, intraarticular nonunion or malunion, and cartilage lesions were excluded from this study. Contracture and adhesion of soft tissue around the elbow were identified. Surgical treatments included arthroscopic capsulectomy, ligaments and muscle release, and ulnar nerve release. The results were evaluated using the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS) and range of motion of the elbow. Surgery-related complications were assessed.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic release were followed up for between 6 and 35 months, with a mean follow-up time of 10.1 months. The postoperative elbow ROM was 123.2° ± 19°, which was significantly different compared to the preoperative value of 68° ± 32°. In addition, the MEPS score improved from 71.2 ± 10.3 preoperatively to 93.7 ± 6.6 at the final follow-up, a mean improvement of 22.5 (range, 0-55; P < 0.05). Postoperative complications included five cases of prolonged drainage from the portal site, three transient nerve palsies, and one hematoma in the medial elbow.

CONCLUSION

With full recognition by the surgeon of the pathologic changes of the soft tissue around the elbow, arthroscopic release is usually safe and effective for posttraumatic elbow stiffness without symptomatic bony problems.

Arthroscopic arthrolysis leads to improved range of motion and health-related quality of life in post-traumatic elbow stiffness

BACKGROUND

Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is a frequent and disabling complication after elbow trauma. Surgical release is needed if conservative treatment fails. In contrast to open surgical release, arthroscopic arthrolysis is a good and least invasive option to restore joint mobility. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes, range of motion (ROM), and function of post-traumatic elbow contracture after arthroscopic arthrolysis and to assess health-related quality of life (HRQL).

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2013, 44 patients with post-traumatic elbow stiffness were treated by arthroscopic arthrolysis and followed up in a consecutive series. Clinical (ROM) and functional analyses (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire [DASH], Mayo Elbow Performance Index [MEPI]) were performed at final follow-up 3 (1-7) years postoperatively. Furthermore, HRQL was evaluated (EQ-5D, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]).

DISCUSSION

The average arc of elbow motion increased from 84° ± 28° preoperatively to 120° ± 18° postoperatively. All applied scores significantly improved pre- to postoperatively: the MEPI (59.8 ± 17.3 / 84.3 ± 14.0), DASH (43.5 ± 23.1 / 16.8 ± 15.6), EQ-5D (72.8 ± 16.6 / 84.0 ± 13.6), and SF-36 showed improved results in all categories. Univariate logistic regression revealed that preoperative pain level predicts a poorer postoperative outcome measured with the MEPI score. Revision arthroscopy was needed in 1 case because of persistent pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic arthrolysis leads to good clinical and functional results in post-traumatic elbow stiffness regarding ROM, pain relief, functionality, and quality of life. The complication rate as well as the revision rate is very low.

Safety of Arthroscopic Versus Open or Combined Heterotopic Ossification Removal Around the Elbow

PURPOSE

To analyze the complications of arthroscopic heterotopic ossification (HO) excision and compare them with those of open removal of HO or a combined open-arthroscopic approach.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of elbow HO removal cases performed by a single surgeon from 1997 to 2014. In all cases studied, the intention was to restore range of motion owing to the presence of HO causing functional impairment. The arthroscopic, open, and combined treatment groups were compared.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 223 surgical procedures performed on 213 elbows in 211 patients. Fifty major complications occurred in 46 cases (21%): 17 hematomas (8%) treated by irrigation and debridement, 8 cases of HO requiring reoperation (4%), 7 deep infections (3%), 4 contractures (2%), 3 cases of delayed-onset ulnar neuritis (1%), 2 cases of distal humeral avascular necrosis (1%), 2 tendon ruptures (1%), 2 cases of instability requiring reconstruction (1%), 2 postoperative fractures (1%), 1 intraoperative fracture (<0.5%), 1 case of worsening of pre-existing neuropathic pain (<0.5%), and 1 permanent partial posterior interosseous nerve injury (<0.5%). Of these 46 cases, the major complications occurred in 6 of the 41 (15%) performed arthroscopically, in 36 of the 158 (23%) performed open and in 4 of the 21 (17%) with combined (i.e. open + arthroscopic) HO removal. Preventive strategies, introduced to prevent hematomas and delayed-onset ulnar neuritis, reduced the rate of major complications from 35% during the period from 1997 to 2005 to 10% during the period from 2006 to 2014 (P < .0001). Moreover, the rate of reoperations was reduced from 34% to 10% in the same periods (P < .0001). Minor complications occurred in 36 cases (16%), including 17 cases of transient nerve palsy, 9 cases of superficial infection or delayed wound healing, 6 cases of mild instability, and 4 cases of hematoma resolved by aspiration.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of arthroscopy-or a combination of arthroscopic and open techniques-to remove HO around the elbow by a surgeon skilled in both arthroscopic and open elbow surgery does not increase the risk of major complications or need for reoperation compared with traditional open surgery. Preventive strategies, such as avoiding raising skin flaps by using multiple separate incisions for open and prophylactic ulnar nerve decompression in arthroscopic cases, were developed during the study period. These strategies were monitored prospectively and found to be effective in preventing two-thirds of the major complications needing reoperation with both open and arthroscopic HO removal.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study of prospectively collected data.

Arthroscopic arthrolysis of posttraumatic and non-traumatic elbow stiffness offers comparable clinical outcomes

Background

Primary purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic arthrolysis in posttraumatic and non-traumatic elbow stiffness. Secondary aims are to compare the level of satisfaction and complications.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated the patients undergoing arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis between January 2008 and September 2015 and have completed a minimum 2-year follow-up. Total of 141 patients (male = 90; female = 51) with 143 elbows (posttraumatic, n = 75; non-traumatic, n = 68) with an average age of 33 years were available for final evaluation. The average follow-up period was 44 months. We used the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) score, range of motion (ROM), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) to measure clinical outcomes. The level of satisfaction was measured by a self-constructed questionnaire.

Results

All parameters were significantly improved postoperatively (P < 0.01). However, statistically significant differences were not present in the rate of postoperative improvement of elbow ROM (P = 0.08) and MEPI (P = 0.21) in both groups. According to MEPI, 72(96%) elbows in posttraumatic and 60(88%) elbows in non-traumatic group were rated as good to excellent. No statistically significant differences were observed in the level of satisfaction (P = 0.76) and rate of complications (P = 0.91).

Conclusions

Arthroscopic arthrolysis is an effective tool and a good option for the treatment of patients with posttraumatic and non-traumatic elbow stiffness. The rate of elbow ROM and MEPI score improvements were significant and comparable postoperatively with a high level of patient’s satisfaction. However, postoperative rehabilitation is equally essential to maintain intraoperative elbow ROM, to attain optimal outcome and to prevent complications.

Arthroscopic release for the severely stiff elbow

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic release for the stiff elbow has been widely used, but there are no reports limited to severe stiffness. The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcomes of severe cases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten patients with 10 severely stiff elbows defined by a limited arc of ≤ 60° underwent this arthroscopic release. Causes of stiffness were post-traumatic stiffness (one patient), osteoarthritis (three patients), and rheumatoid arthritis (six patients). Using arthroscopy, the capsule contracture and the intra-articular fibrosis were removed and the impinging osteophyte and part of the radial head were resected. For four patients with preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms or contracture of the posterior oblique ligament of the medial collateral ligament, mini-open ulnar nerve neurolysis and release of the posterior oblique ligament were performed. Patients were followed up for an average of 24 months.

RESULTS

Arthroscopic release could be performed without any intraoperative complications. Range of motion for the elbow significantly improved from 95° of flexion and - 55° of extension to 109° of flexion and - 32° of extension. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score also improved from 56 points to 80 points. Two patients underwent a second arthroscopic surgery and gained further arc of motion. One patient showed osteophyte reformation and needed revision open surgery 1 year after the initial surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic release for the severely stiff elbow could improve range of motion. Careful attention should be given during surgery to avoid complications such as intramuscular bleeding or nerve damage.

Arthrofibrosis and large joint scarring

Large joint arthrofibrosis and scarring, involving the shoulder, elbow, hip, and knee, can result in the loss of function and immobility. The pathway of joint contracture formation is still being elucidated and is due to aberrations in collagen synthesis and misorientation of collagen fibrils. Novel antibodies are being developed to prevent arthrofibrosis, and current treatment methods for arthrofibrosis include medical, physical, and surgical treatments. This article describes the biology of joint contracture formation, along with current and future pharmacologic, biologic, and medical interventions.

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.

Posttraumatic Elbow Stiffness: A Critical Analysis Review

Open and arthroscopic release are both effective surgical treatments for posttraumatic elbow stiffness. Both static and dynamic bracing are effective for increasing elbow range of motion when heterotopic ossification is not present. Some loss of immediate postoperative range of motion is expected. Recurrence of heterotopic ossification around the elbow is rare. The occurrence of ulnar nerve palsy is rare and often requires transposition.

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.

Mid-Term Outcomes of Arthroscopic Treatment in Patients with a Stiff Elbow

Introduction Loss of function and pain are the main complaints at the time of hospital admission for patients with a stiff elbow. In this study, we present mid-term radiological and functional results for the use of the arthroscopic release technique in patients admitted to the outpatient clinic with a stiff elbow. Methods A total of 22 patients (six females, 16 males; mean age: 36 years, range: 18 to 56 years) who underwent an arthroscopic intervention for traumatic or non-traumatic stiff elbow and arthrosis between January 2005 and November 2015 were included in the study. All patients started elbow movement after the first day following surgery. Pre- and postoperative radiological evaluations of patients were carried out, in addition to functional evaluation to measure the range of motion of the elbow joint and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores before and after surgery. Results The mean follow-up was 28.4 (range: 21 to 118) months. The mean preoperative flexion-extension arc of the patients was 89° (range: 0° to 115°), and the mean flexion-extension arc increased to 103.5° (range: 52° to 128°) at the final follow-up visit (p < 0.05). The mean preoperative DASH score was 42.17 (range: 33 to 81), decreasing to 30.35 (range: 9.7 to 41.3) postoperatively (p<0.05). In the final visit, none of the patients were found to require additional surgical interventions for the elbow. Conclusions Arthroscopic release can be considered a safe and effective option to obtain range of motion in joints in post-traumatic stiff elbow cases.

Arthroscopic arthrolysis provides good clinical outcome in post-traumatic and degenerative elbow stiffness

PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this retrospective study was to report on the functional outcome after arthroscopic arthrolysis in patients with post-traumatic or degenerative elbow stiffness. It was hypothesized that this operative procedure leads to improved range of motion (ROM) and improved functional outcome in both groups.

METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic arthrolysis of the elbow between 2010 and 2015 were included in this study. Forty-two patients with an average age of 41.0 ± 13.5 years were available for evaluation. The mean follow-up was 28.3 ± 14.9 months. With regard to aetiology of elbow contractures, patients were divided into post-traumatic (group A) and degenerative (group B) cohort. General patients' data, previous surgical treatment and ROM were recorded. At follow-up evaluation, the clinical outcome was assessed by the ROM, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain assessment and the Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS).

RESULTS

The mean arc of motion of group A (n = 20) increased from preoperatively 74.3° to 120.5° postoperatively (p < 0.001); group B (n = 22) showed an improvement of 104.6° preoperatively to 123.4° after surgery (p = 0.002). Mean improvement was 46.3° ± 27.5° in group A and 16.4° ± 19.4° in group B. Mean post-operative VAS was 0.9 ± 1.5 in group A and 1.3 ± 2.2 in group B. 92.9% of patients achieved a functional arc of elbow motion >100°. The ESAS indicated good to excellent clinical outcome showing 88.8 ± 10.0 points in group A and 84.1 ± 21.4 points in group B. Thirty-six patients (85.7%) returned to their previous work level after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic arthrolysis is an effective treatment option for patients with restriction in elbow motion reasoned by post-traumatic or degenerative changes. Both groups showed a significant improvement of ROM and comparable outcome scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, Level IV.

The Olecranon Osteotomy-Facilitated Elbow Release (OFER)

BACKGROUND

Elbow contractures can cause functional limitation, and treatment can be challenging. The purpose of this article is to describe a novel technique that releases posttraumatic elbow contractures through an olecranon osteotomy and report the outcomes.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients with refractory posttraumatic elbow contracture who underwent an olecranon osteotomy-facilitated elbow release (OFER) procedure were included in the study. The average patient age was 39.5 years (range, 18 to 63 years), and the mean duration of follow-up was 37.2 months (range, 24 to 72 months). Preoperative and postoperative data included age, sex, cause of contracture, previous surgical procedures, active elbow range of motion, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores, visual analog scale pain scores, and radiographs. Intraoperative tourniquet time and complications were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative elbow motion arc was 33° (51° to 84° of flexion). Postoperatively, the motion arc improved significantly (p < 0.001) to 110° (16° to 126° of flexion). The mean visual analog pain scale score improved from 6.3 preoperatively to 1.4 at the time of follow-up (p < 0.001). The mean DASH score improved from 57.5 preoperatively to 10.9 postoperatively (p < 0.001). The maximal improvement in the motion arc occurred at a mean of 8.7 weeks. There was 1 postoperative ulnar neurapraxia that resolved spontaneously. The intraoperative tourniquet time averaged 27 minutes (range, 18 to 45 minutes). The average time until radiographic evidence of union of the olecranon osteotomy site was 6.6 weeks (range, 5.7 to 7.7 weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

The OFER is a safe and effective means of treating posttraumatic elbow contractures, and is an alternative to traditional open or arthroscopic techniques.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Dynamic Splint for the Treatment of Stiff Elbow

Background

The purpose of this paper is to retrospectively evaluate the results of the treatment of elbow stiffness with the use of dynamic splints.

Methods

We included 17 patients with stable and congruent joints, with a range of motion of 100 degrees or less who had not responded to the rehabilitation program. Average previous mobility was 108–42 degrees, with a total arc of 66 degrees. The splints consist of an articulated brace with springs. On average their use began 94 days after surgery or trauma and continued for 86 days. Statistical analysis was performed. Average follow-up was 18 months.

Results

Postoperative mobility was 126–19 degrees, with a total arc of 107 degrees. Motion increased an average of 41 degrees. Six patients failed to recover a functional arc of motion.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that dynamic splints are useful in the treatment of elbow stiffness. We achieved an average improvement of 41° in the arc of motion, which in many cases has rendered arthrolysis unnecessary. Tailoring the splint to the individual patient is very important since its usage must be prolonged in order to achieve plastic deformity through the principle of progressive stretching.

Surgical management of the elderly elbow

The elbow has a major role in helping with the positioning of the hand in space. Any pathology of the joint can result in pain, loss of function and difficulties with activities of daily living. With an increasingly elderly population the degenerative conditions affecting the elbow are becoming more prevalent. Besides traumatic injury, the more commonly encountered problems are osteoarthritis, inflammatory arthritis, nerve compression and stiffness. An awareness of these conditions is important for those who provide care to this patient group. Whilst many of these conditions can be managed conservatively in primary care, some patients are referred to secondary care and elect for surgical treatments. This review considers the surgical treatments for the common elbow pathologies in the elderly population, including the potential complications associated with such treatments.

Open arthrolysis with pie-crusting release of the triceps tendon for treating post-traumatic contracture of the elbow

BACKGROUND

Extensive loss of elbow flexion compromises the performance of daily activities. We examined the clinical outcomes of patients with post-traumatic extension contracture of the elbow treated with open arthrolysis and pie-crusting release of the triceps tendon.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of 7 patients (5 men and 2 women; mean age, 35 years) who underwent open arthrolysis via a combined lateral and medial approach with pie-crusting release of the triceps tendon for the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness. All the patients had heterotopic ossification that restricted elbow motion and underwent removal of the ossified tissue and capsular release. The triceps tendon was gradually stretched by making multiple stab incisions on the tendon by using a No. 11 surgical blade. The range of motion of the elbow was recorded both preoperatively and at the final postoperative follow-up. Elbow function was assessed with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score.

RESULTS

The patients were followed up for a mean of 24 months. After treatment, significant improvement was noted in the total arc of motion (from 44° to 116°, P <.001), mean flexion (from 80° to 124°, P < .001), and mean extension (from 31° to 8°, P = .004). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved significantly from 59 points preoperatively to 92 points at the final evaluation. No major postoperative complications developed in any of the patients.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that open arthrolysis with pie-crusting release of the triceps tendon is an effective and safe treatment approach for post-traumatic extension contracture of the elbow.

Increased ROM and high patient satisfaction after open arthrolysis: a follow-up-study of 43 patients with posttraumatic stiff elbows

Background

Posttraumatic stiffness of the elbow is a common finding after elbow trauma. Restoration of motion in the posttraumatic stiff elbow is difficult, time consuming, and requires high patient compliance. We have evaluated the long-term effect of an open elbow arthrolysis in the posttraumatic stiff elbow.

Methods

We evaluated 43 patients (14 women, 29 men) with a median age of 47(16–78) years operated with open arthrolysis for a posttraumatic stiff elbow. The median follow-up time was 41(12–204) months. The patients were hospitalized median 12(4–14) days, with daily physiotherapy and NSAID. 36 patients tolerated continuous passive motion (CPM) for 11(0–42) days. 35 patients had a well-functioning brachial plexus anesthesia for median 7(1–18) days. We used the paired 2-tailed T-test in our statistical analysis.

Results

Preoperatively the patients had a median flexion of 110(30–160)°, extension 40(10–90)°, and the total flexion-extension sector (F/E) was 50(0–110)°. At follow-up the patients had a median flexion of 132(75–151)° and extension of 23(8–84)°, which indicate a median gain of 42(−50–114)°. The subjective functional scores (Mayo Elbow Score, EQ5D, Q-Dash, and VAS for pain) were satisfying, and most of the patients (81 %) would have done the operation once again knowing the outcome. We had 5 temporary ulnar neuropraxias, one became permanent and in addition ankylotic, one temporary radial neuropraxia, two superficial wound infections, and one transient hematoma.

Conclusion

Open arthrolysis of the posttraumatic stiff elbow is associated with reliable clinical and functional long-term outcomes.

POST-TRAUMATIC STIFFNESS OF THE ELBOW

Elbow stiffness is a common problem after joint trauma, causing functional impairment of the upper limb. The severity of the dysfunction depends on the nature of the initial trauma and the treatment used. Appropriate clinical evaluation and complementary examinations are essential for therapeutic planning. Several surgical techniques are now available and the recommendation must be made in accordance with patient characteristics, degree of joint limitation and the surgeon's skill. Joint incongruence and degeneration have negative effects on the prognosis, but heterotrophic ossification alone has been correlated with a favorable surgical prognosis.

Elbow Positioning and Joint Insufflation Substantially Influence Median and Radial Nerve Locations

BACKGROUND

The median and radial nerves are at risk of iatrogenic injury when performing arthroscopic arthrolysis with anterior capsulectomy. Although prior anatomic studies have identified the position of these nerves, little is known about how elbow positioning and joint insufflation might influence nerve locations.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In a cadaver model, we sought to determine whether (1) the locations of the median and radial nerves change with variation of elbow positioning; and whether (2) flexion and joint insufflation increase the distance of the median and radial nerves to osseous landmarks after correcting for differences in size of the cadaveric specimens.

METHODS

The median and radial nerves were marked with a radiopaque thread in 11 fresh-frozen elbow specimens. Three-dimensional radiographic scans were performed in extension, in 90° flexion, and after joint insufflations in neutral rotation, pronation, and supination. Trochlear and capitellar widths were analyzed. The distances of the median nerve to the medial and anterior edge of the trochlea and to the coronoid were measured. The distances of the radial nerve to the lateral and anterior edge of the capitulum and to the anterior edge of the radial head were measured. We analyzed the mediolateral nerve locations as a percentage function of the trochlear and capitellar widths to control for differences regarding the size of the specimens.

RESULTS

The mean distance of the radial nerve to the lateral edge of the capitulum as a percentage function of the capitellar width increased from 68% ± 17% in extension to 91% ± 23% in flexion (mean difference = 23%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5%-41%; p = 0.01). With the numbers available, no such difference was observed regarding the location of the median nerve in relation to the medial border of the trochlea (mean difference = 5%; 95% CI, -13% to 22%; p = 0.309). Flexion and joint insufflation increased the distance of the nerves to osseous landmarks. The mean distance of the median nerve to the coronoid tip was 5.4 ± 1.3 mm in extension, 9.1 ± 2.3 mm in flexion (mean difference = 3.7 mm; 95% CI, 2.04-5.36 mm; p < 0.001), and 12.6 ± 3.6 mm in flexion and insufflation (mean difference = 3.5 mm; 95% CI, 0.81-6.19 mm; p = 0.008). The mean distance of the radial nerve to the anterior edge of the radial head increased from 4.7 ± 1.8 mm in extension to 7.7 ± 2.7 mm in flexion (mean difference = 3.0 mm; 95% CI, 0.96-5.04 mm; p = 0.005) and to 11.9 ± 3.0 mm in flexion with additional joint insufflation (mean difference = 4.2 mm; 95% CI, 1.66-6.74 mm; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The radial nerve shifts medially during flexion from the lateral to the medial border of the inner third of the capitulum. The median nerve is located at the medial quarter of the joint. The distance of the median and radial nerves to osseous landmarks doubles from extension to 90° flexion and triples after joint insufflation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Elbow arthroscopy with anterior capsulectomy should be performed cautiously at the medial aspect of the joint to avoid median nerve lesions. Performing arthroscopic anterior capsulectomy in flexion at the lateral aspect of the joint and in slight extension at the medial edge of the capitulum could enhance safety of this procedure.

Outcomes of arthroscopic arthrolysis for the post-traumatic elbow stiffness

PURPOSE

Post-traumatic contracture is a common complication after elbow trauma. If conservative therapy fails to restore adequate elbow motion, surgical release is recommended. Increase in arthroscopy knowledge and skills, as well as technological advances in the passed decade of years, has made arthroscopic arthrolysis a safe and reliable treatment for patients with a post-traumatic elbow contracture. The aim of this study was to report on the clinical outcome and improvement of ROM in post-traumatic stiff elbow treated by arthroscopic arthrolysis.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2012, 34 consecutive patients with post-traumatic stiffness were treated with arthroscopic arthrolysis. Active and passive elbow movement is encouraged the day after operation with the effective pain management. Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and visual analogue scale were measured.

RESULTS

At the final follow-up, the average arc of elbow motion increased from 48.6 ± 19.3 pre-operatively to 114.5 ± 25.7, with a mean improvement of 65.9°. The MEPI score improved from 68.2 ± 16.4 pre-operatively to 92.4 ± 21.6, with a mean improvement of 24.2 (p < 0.001). Results were good to excellent in 29 patients.

CONCLUSION

Injuries are the most common cause of elbow stiffness requiring surgical release. The procedure of arthroscopic arthrolysis is a good option for the treatment of post-traumatic elbow stiffness as it restores normal elbow function. Early passive/active post-operative rehabilitation is very important.

Arthroscopic joint debridement and capsular release in primary and post-traumatic elbow osteoarthritis: a retrospective blinded cohort study with minimum 24-month follow-up

BACKGROUND

Elbow osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative condition which in the advanced stage can severely impair joint mobility. Conservative treatment remains the first choice; surgery should be considered in case of failure in patients prepared to adhere to a demanding rehabilitation protocol. We assess the effectiveness of arthroscopic joint debridement and capsular release in a series of patients with primary and post-traumatic elbow arthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-eight subjects (40 males, eight females; mean age 48 years) with a preoperative diagnosis of primary (19, 40 %) or post-traumatic OA (29, 60 %) were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 44 months. Outcome measures were active range of motion (ROM), pain score, Oxford elbow score (OES), and Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS). OA severity was graded into three classes (I-III) based on X-ray findings. Statistical significance was set at 5 %.

RESULTS

At the final follow-up evaluation, active flexion/extension increased significantly (p < 0.01); pronation and supination improved, but the difference was not significant (p > 0.05). The pain score improved from 7.2 to 4.3 (p < 0.01). Both OES and MEPS improved significantly (p < 0.001). Patients with post-traumatic OA had better ROM (p = 0.0391) and clinical scores (OES, p = 0.011; MEPS, p = 0.010). ROM and clinical scores were lower but not significantly so in class II than in class I patients. A smooth coronoid and olecranon fossa was found in 38 (79 %) patients and a preserved ulnotrochlear joint space in 40 (80 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Elbow OA has become more common as a result of earlier diagnosis and an increased number of acute injuries involving the joint. Arthroscopy is an effective technique to treat OA which provides the best results with the correct indications. Prospective studies are needed to help develop guidelines enabling selection of the best treatment option.

Elbow Positioning and Joint Insufflation Substantially Influence Median and Radial Nerve Locations

BACKGROUND

The median and radial nerves are at risk of iatrogenic injury when performing arthroscopic arthrolysis with anterior capsulectomy. Although prior anatomic studies have identified the position of these nerves, little is known about how elbow positioning and joint insufflation might influence nerve locations.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In a cadaver model, we sought to determine whether (1) the locations of the median and radial nerves change with variation of elbow positioning; and whether (2) flexion and joint insufflation increase the distance of the median and radial nerves to osseous landmarks after correcting for differences in size of the cadaveric specimens.

METHODS

The median and radial nerves were marked with a radiopaque thread in 11 fresh-frozen elbow specimens. Three-dimensional radiographic scans were performed in extension, in 90° flexion, and after joint insufflations in neutral rotation, pronation, and supination. Trochlear and capitellar widths were analyzed. The distances of the median nerve to the medial and anterior edge of the trochlea and to the coronoid were measured. The distances of the radial nerve to the lateral and anterior edge of the capitulum and to the anterior edge of the radial head were measured. We analyzed the mediolateral nerve locations as a percentage function of the trochlear and capitellar widths to control for differences regarding the size of the specimens.

RESULTS

The mean distance of the radial nerve to the lateral edge of the capitulum as a percentage function of the capitellar width increased from 68% ± 17% in extension to 91% ± 23% in flexion (mean difference = 23%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5%-41%; p = 0.01). With the numbers available, no such difference was observed regarding the location of the median nerve in relation to the medial border of the trochlea (mean difference = 5%; 95% CI, -13% to 22%; p = 0.309). Flexion and joint insufflation increased the distance of the nerves to osseous landmarks. The mean distance of the median nerve to the coronoid tip was 5.4 ± 1.3 mm in extension, 9.1 ± 2.3 mm in flexion (mean difference = 3.7 mm; 95% CI, 2.04-5.36 mm; p < 0.001), and 12.6 ± 3.6 mm in flexion and insufflation (mean difference = 3.5 mm; 95% CI, 0.81-6.19 mm; p = 0.008). The mean distance of the radial nerve to the anterior edge of the radial head increased from 4.7 ± 1.8 mm in extension to 7.7 ± 2.7 mm in flexion (mean difference = 3.0 mm; 95% CI, 0.96-5.04 mm; p = 0.005) and to 11.9 ± 3.0 mm in flexion with additional joint insufflation (mean difference = 4.2 mm; 95% CI, 1.66-6.74 mm; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The radial nerve shifts medially during flexion from the lateral to the medial border of the inner third of the capitulum. The median nerve is located at the medial quarter of the joint. The distance of the median and radial nerves to osseous landmarks doubles from extension to 90° flexion and triples after joint insufflation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Elbow arthroscopy with anterior capsulectomy should be performed cautiously at the medial aspect of the joint to avoid median nerve lesions. Performing arthroscopic anterior capsulectomy in flexion at the lateral aspect of the joint and in slight extension at the medial edge of the capitulum could enhance safety of this procedure.

Elbow arthroscopy: An alternative to anteromedial portals

BACKGROUND

Elbow arthroscopy is considered to be a difficult procedure with a high complication rate. These two disadvantages are due to the proximity of neurovascular structures.

HYPOTHESIS

The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and complication rate of a new elbow arthroscopy technique without anteromedial portals. This approach was taken because of the high rate of ulnar nerve damage using the medial portal, and the difficulty of performing triangulation of opposite portals in a patient in the lateral decubitus position.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifteen patients were operated on by the same surgeon between 2010 and 2012. Range of motion and the "MEPS" elbow score were calculated preoperatively and at the final postoperative follow-up. The average age of patients was 38.3 years. The follow-up was 11.1 months. Personal portals (high anterolateral and intermediate anterolateral portals) were used instead of the anteromedial portals.

RESULTS

Elbow flexion increased from 113° preoperatively to 129° at the final follow-up (P=0.009). Extension increased from -33° to -10° (P<0.0001). The preoperative and final postoperative "MEPS" scores were 56.3 and 94 respectively (P<0.0001). Two patients (13.3%) had radial nerve palsy with complete recovery 6 and 9 months after surgery.

DISCUSSION

The rate of nerve complications following elbow arthroscopy varies from 0 to 14%. The rate in our series (13.3%) is comparable to the results of the literature. This rate should be placed in perspective (since one patient had multiple open surgery elbow operations before arthroscopy). All complications were transient. Improved elbow range of motion in our study is consistent with the results in literature.

Elbow arthroscopy: early complications and associated risk factors

BACKGROUND

Elbow arthroscopy is increasingly used to treat complex pathology. The purpose of this study was to investigate early complication rates after elbow arthroscopy and identify risk factors for adverse events.

METHODS

Consecutive elbow arthroscopies performed during a 13-year period were reviewed, identifying early perioperative complications. Major complications included deep infection, permanent nerve injury, or complications requiring additional anesthesia. Minor complications included superficial wound complications and transient nerve palsies. Complications were compared with a surgical complexity scale based on the procedure performed, the number of arthroscopic portals, and tourniquet time.

RESULTS

Of 417 procedures, there were 37 minor (8.9%) and 20 major (4.8%) complications. The rates of superficial and deep infections were 6.7% and 2.2%, respectively. Major complications included 9 deep infections, 6 cases of heterotopic ossification requiring further surgery, and 4 manipulations under anesthesia. There were 7 transient sensory nerve complications, and no motor deficits. No differences in complication rates were seen between low-, moderate-, and high-complexity (10.2%, 16.3% and 14.4%, respectively) cases. Intraoperative steroid injections were strongly associated with postoperative superficial (14.1% vs 2.0%) and deep infection (4.9% vs 0.4%) in elbows receiving vs those not receiving steroid (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Complications of elbow arthroscopy are seen in approximately 14% of cases. Most complications are minor, not affecting clinical outcome. Major complications occur in 5% of cases, often requiring repeat surgery. Intraoperative postsurgical steroid injections are associated with increased risk of perioperative infections. Case complexity does not appear to affect the rate of complications with modern surgical techniques.

Elbow arthroscopy in stiff elbow

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate and review the functional outcomes after arthroscopic surgery in post-traumatic and degenerative elbow contractures.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2008, 243 patients with post-traumatic or degenerative elbow stiffness were treated with arthroscopic surgery. A total of 212 patients were reviewed at an average of 58 months follow-up (SD ± 17.3). The patients were divided into two groups: group A with post-traumatic stiffness, and group B with degenerative stiffness. Arthroscopic procedures performed included: synovectomy, debridement of osteophytes, removal of loose bodies, anterior and posterior capsulectomy, radial head excision. Ulnar nerve neurolysis was usually performed. The following data were recorded and analysed: sex, age, paraesthesia, previous surgical treatment and complications. Patient outcome was assessed pre- and post-operatively by a visual analogue scale and by the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI), which assesses pain, ROM, stability and function.

RESULTS

The total average ROM improved by 33° in group A and 20° in Group B. The MEPI improved from 60 to 81 in group A, and from 65 to 91 in group B.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic surgery in post-traumatic and degenerative elbow contractures can be considered a safe, useful, with a long learning curve procedure that offers important improvement of the ROM decreasing surgical morbidity.

Elbow arthroscopic surgery update for sports medicine conditions

Elbow arthroscopic surgery can now effectively treat a variety of conditions that affect athletes. Advances in instrumentation, increased surgeon familiarity, and expanded indications have led to significant growth in elbow arthroscopic surgery in the past few decades. While positioning, portal placement, and specific instruments may vary among surgeons, anatomic considerations guide surgical approaches to minimize neurovascular compromise. Arthroscopic procedures vary in difficulty, and surgeons should follow stepwise advancement with experience. Removal of loose bodies, debridement of synovial plicae, and debridement of the extensor carpi radialis brevis for lateral epicondylitis are considered simple procedures for novice elbow arthroscopic surgeons. More advanced procedures include management of osteochondritis dissecans, valgus extension overload in the throwing athlete, and capsular release. With proper technique, a variety of athletic elbow conditions can be treated arthroscopically with predictable results and minimal morbidity.

Primary and posttraumatic arthritis of the elbow

Whether degenerative joint disease of the elbow may be the result of primary or posttraumatic etiologies, arthritis of the elbow commonly leads to pain, loss of motion, and functional disability. A detailed history and focused physical examination, in combination with imaging modalities, can help localize the origin of symptoms and help direct treatment. Although nonoperative treatment is the initial therapy for arthritis of the elbow, surgical interventions may provide substantial relief to the appropriately selected patient.

The contracted elbow: is ulnar nerve release necessary?

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic release of the ulnar nerve in patients undergoing capsular release for severe elbow contractures has been recommended, although there are limited data to support this recommendation. Our hypothesis was that more severely limited preoperative flexion and extension would be associated with a higher incidence of postoperative ulnar nerve symptoms in patients undergoing capsular release.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 164 consecutive patients who underwent open or arthroscopic elbow capsular release for stiffness between 2003 and 2010. The ulnar nerve was decompressed if the patient had preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms or a positive Tinel test. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion and incidence of ulnar nerve symptoms were recorded.

RESULTS

The mean improvement in the arc of motion of was 36.7°. New-onset postoperative ulnar nerve symptoms developed in 7 of 87 patients (8.1%) who did not undergo ulnar nerve decompression; eventually, 5 of these patients with persistent symptoms underwent ulnar nerve decompression. The rate of developing postoperative symptoms was higher if patients had preoperative flexion ≤ 100° (15.2%) compared with those with preoperative flexion >100° (3.7%). There was no association between preoperative extension or gain in motion arc and postoperative symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall rate of ulnar nerve symptoms after elbow contracture release was low if ulnar nerve decompression was performed in patients with preoperative symptoms or a positive Tinel test. There was a higher rate of ulnar nerve symptoms in patients with more severe contractures (≤ 100° of preoperative flexion), which did not reach statistical significance.

Posttraumatic elbow stiffness

Early posttraumatic elbow contractures may be treated with a combination of manipulation with the patient under anesthesia followed by bracing.Extrinsic contractures of the elbow may be treated with open or arthroscopic release, whereas intrinsic and combined contractures may require tissue release as well as partial or total arthroplasty.

Outcomes of open arthrolysis of the elbow without post-operative passive stretching

The use of passive stretching of the elbow after arthrolysis is controversial. We report the results of open arthrolysis in 81 patients. Prospectively collected outcome data with a minimum follow-up of one year were analysed. All patients had sustained an intra-articular fracture initially and all procedures were performed by the same surgeon under continuous brachial plexus block anaesthesia and with continuous passive movement (CPM) used post-operatively for two to three days. CPM was used to maintain the movement achieved during surgery and passive stretching was not used at any time. A senior physiotherapist assessed all the patients at regular intervals. The mean range of movement (ROM) improved from 69° to 109° and the function and pain of the upper limb improved from 32 to 16 and from 20 to 10, as assessed by the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand score and a visual analogue scale, respectively. The greatest improvement was obtained in the stiffest elbows: nine patients with a pre-operative ROM < 30° achieved a mean post-operative ROM of 92° (55° to 125°). This study demonstrates that in patients with a stiff elbow after injury, good results may be obtained after open elbow arthrolysis without using passive stretching during rehabilitation.

ARTHROSCOPIC TREATMENT OF POST-TRAUMATIC ELBOW STIFFNESS

To evaluate patients undergoing arthroscopic release of a stiff elbow, with discussion of the technique, possible difficulties and risks. Methods: Twenty-four elbow arthroscopy procedures were performed. All the patients were evaluated using goniometry before the operation and six months afterwards and were rated using the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS). Results: Fifteen men and nine women underwent surgery (14 right elbows and ten left elbows). Their mean age was 34.58 years and length of follow-up, 38.41 months. Their mean gain of range of motion was 43.3° and of MEPS, 85.4. Conclusion: Arthroscopic release might enable better intra-articular viewing and enhance the options for changing strategy during surgery, reducing surgical trauma and enabling early rehabilitation. This technique can reach similar or better results than open surgery. The disadvantages of arthroscopy are the long learning curve and higher cost of the procedure. Neurovascular complications are reported with both techniques. To avoid such problems, the protocol for portal construction must be rigorously followed. Arthroscopic release was shown to be a safe and effective option for achieving range-of-motion gains in cases of post-traumatic stiff elbow.

Evidence-based indications for elbow arthroscopy

PURPOSE

The purpose was to review the literature on the outcomes of elbow arthroscopy and to make evidence-based recommendations for or against elbow arthroscopy for the treatment of various conditions. Our hypothesis was that the evidence would support the use of elbow arthroscopy in the management of common elbow conditions.

METHODS

A literature search was performed by use of the PubMed database in October 2010. All therapeutic studies investigating the results of treatment with elbow arthroscopy were analyzed for outcomes and complications. The literature specific to common elbow arthroscopy indications was summarized and was assigned a grade of recommendation based on the available evidence.

RESULTS

There is fair-quality evidence for elbow arthroscopy in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis of the elbow and lateral epicondylitis (grade B recommendation). There is poor-quality evidence for, rather than against, the arthroscopic treatment of degenerative arthritis, osteochondritis dissecans, radial head resection, loose bodies, post-traumatic arthrofibrosis, posteromedial impingement, excision of a plica, and fractures of the capitellum, coronoid process, and radial head (grade C(f) recommendation). There is insufficient evidence to give a recommendation for or against the arthroscopic treatment of posterolateral rotatory instability and septic arthritis (grade I recommendation).

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence supports the use of elbow arthroscopy in the management of the majority of conditions where it is currently used. The quality of the evidence, however, is generally fair to poor.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Capsulectomy and debridement for primary osteoarthritis of the elbow through a medial trans-flexor approach

PURPOSE

Debridement arthroplasty combined with capsulectomy for primary osteoarthritis of the elbow is a useful procedure to relieve pain and increase mobility. We have used a medial trans-flexor approach without tendon detachment for debridement arthroplasty of the elbow and evaluated the outcome of this procedure.

METHODS

Thirty-one elbows with primary osteoarthritis in 31 patients treated with debridement arthroplasty were available for follow-up at a mean of 19 ± 7 months. Twenty-four patients were men, and 7 were women. The mean age at the time of surgery was 59 ± 10 years. All elbows were painful only at the end points of motion. The anterior compartment of the elbow was accessed by splitting of the pronator flexor muscle group without tendon detachment. Routine anterior subcutaneous transposition of the ulnar nerve was used in all elbows. In 10 elbows, osteophytes or loose osseous bodies from the lateral compartment were removed through an additional lateral approach.

RESULTS

Twenty-three elbows had no pain, and 8 elbows had mild pain. The mean preoperative limitation of extension decreased from 29° ± 9° to 15° ± 9° and the mean preoperative flexion increased from 100° ± 10° to 126° ± 7°. Thus, the mean arc of elbow motion increased by 40° ± 13°. The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 94 ± 7 compared with 60 ± 5 before surgery. The results were excellent for 22 elbows and good for 9. Hematomas developed in 3 elbows, but they did not require surgical drainage.

CONCLUSIONS

Debridement arthroplasty using the medial trans-flexor approach without tendon detachment yields satisfactory short-term clinical results. This approach is associated with a low rate of complications and is safe and effective for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the elbow.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Arthroscopic treatment of stiff elbow

Contracture of the elbow represents a disabling condition that can impair a person's quality of life. Regardless of the event that causes an elbow contracture, the conservative or surgical treatment is usually considered technically difficult and associated with complications. When the conservative treatment fails to restore an acceptable range of motion in the elbow, open techniques have been shown to be successful options. More recently the use of arthroscopy has become more popular for several reasons. These reasons include better visualization of intra-articular structures, less tissue trauma from open incisions, and potentially the ability to begin early postoperative motion. The purpose of this paper is to review the indications, complications, and results of arthroscopic management of a stiff elbow.

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.

Arthroscopic treatment for limitation of motion of the elbow: the learning curve

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to demonstrate our learning curve in arthroscopic treatment for limitation of motion of the elbow.

METHODS

To verify the surrogates for learning curve, operative time in 120 consecutive elbows were plotted by case number and the learning curve was illustrated by the best-fit curve. The study population was divided into eight consecutive blocks (15 patients per block) by observing a notable change in the learning from the curve. Mean operative time and mean improvement in motion and clinical score in each block were compared.

RESULTS

Mean operative time decreased significantly from the first block to the second block (133-98). No further significant change was noted thereafter. Contrarily, no significant increase in motion improvement or clinical score improvement was identified but a significant decrease was found between the fourth and fifth block (47-36 and 30-24, respectively). Operative time was negatively correlated with preoperative range of motion (P=0.003). Clinical score improvement was also negatively correlated with preoperative range of motion (P<0.001). Motion improvement was more strongly correlated with preoperative range of motion (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a learning curve in which a significant decrease in operative time was shown after an initial 15 patients. Motion and clinical score improvement were not satisfactory surrogate for learning curve and found to be closely related to preoperative range of motion. Qualification of the learning curve for arthroscopic treatment for limitation of motion of the elbow provides a guide for surgeons assuming the expected time line to become proficient in this technique.

Arthroscopy for arthritis of the elbow

Elbow arthroscopy has been used to treat patients with arthritis since the initial report of its efficacy by Savoie and colleagues in 1992. It has proved extremely useful as an adjunct treatment to decrease symptoms and increase function. A thorough knowledge of anatomy is essential for this modality to be used successfully. In young or active patients, it is the treatment of choice for arthritis of the elbow.

[Indications and technique of combined medial and lateral column procedures in severe extrinsic elbow contractures]

Severe extrinsic elbow contracture can be treated effectively using elbow arthrolysis to obtain satisfactory results. Preoperative planing is of prime importance to evaluate joint involvement and to decide how to approach the capsule from the lateral or medial aspect of the elbow. Most of the time because of the extensive involvement of the periarticular tissue, a combined approach is usually preferred. It is a step-by-step procedure that must be adapted to the progressive gain of motion. The ulnar nerve must be identified systematically and often anteriorly transposed. Maximum gain of motion must be obtained at surgery because loss of elbow motion after surgery is common. Postoperative management must be closely followed static splint being preferable to active physiotherapy. Results of surgical arthrolysis for extrinsic stiffness is often satisfactory with an absolute gain in the flexion-extension arc between 30 and 60°.

[Arthroscopic capsular release of the elbow]

Limited mobility of the elbow joint can be due to various factors, the most common of which is trauma to the elbow. In addition, limited elbow movement can be a direct cause of decreased functionality and interfere with everyday life activities. The majority of the patients can recover a functional range of motion if physical therapy is combined with a splinting regimen. However, some patients will experience continued elbow stiffness. Traditionally, open techniques have been successful in releasing the elbow joint capsule and regaining functional range of motion. Early results of arthroscopic elbow capsule release were associated with an increased rate of peripheral nerve injury. Due to technical progress and modifications, arthroscopic capsular release of the elbow is now a safe and dependable--although technically challenging--method to regain elbow motion.

Arthroscopic arthrolysis for posttraumatic elbow stiffness

BACKGROUND

Loss of motion of the elbow joint is a common finding after elbow trauma. Restoration of motion of the posttraumatic stiff elbow can be a difficult, time-consuming, and costly challenge. Arthroscopic capsular release of stiff elbows has recently been introduced as a safe but technically demanding technique. The outcome in 27 patients treated by arthroscopic capsular release was assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated 27 patients (17 women) who were an average age of 42 years (range, 14-65) at 3, 12, and 24 months after arthroscopic capsular release of a posttraumatic stiff elbow. Range of motion (ROM) and Elbow Function Assessment (EFA) were measured.

RESULTS

Before the arthroscopic procedure, the mean flexion was 123° (SD 8°), extension was 24° (SD 9°), and total ROM was 99° (SD 11°), and after surgery, flexion improved significantly to 133° (SD 5°), extension to 7° (SD 6°), and total ROM to 125° (SD 10°). The mean (SD) EFA showed improvement from 69 (SD 4) preoperatively to 91 (SD 4) postoperatively. The postoperative outcomes at 3, 12 and 24 months were similar. One postoperative superficial infection of the lateral portal occurred and was successfully treated with oral antibiotics. No vascular or neurologic complications were noted.

DISCUSSION

Historical data underscore the fact that arthroscopic release of posttraumatic elbow contracture is technically demanding but can effective improve the elbow arc of motion.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic capsular release of the elbow is a safe and reliable treatment for patients with a posttraumatic elbow contracture.