Treatment of osteoarthritis of the elbow with open or arthroscopic debridement: a narrative review

Open versus arthroscopic treatment of the rheumatoid elbow arthritis: a comparison of complications at two years utilizing a nationally representative database

PURPOSE

Symptomatic rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be addressed surgically with open procedures or elbow arthroscopy. Previous studies comparing outcomes of open to arthroscopic arthrolysis for the management of RA did not utilize a large database study. The aim was to compare demographics and two-year complications, in RA patients undergoing open or arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis.

METHODS

A retrospective, cohort study was performed utilizing a private, nationwide, all-payer database. We queried the database to identify patients undergoing open (n = 578) or arthroscopic (n = 379) arthrolysis for elbow RA. The primary goal of the study was to compare complications at two-years. Categorical variables were assessed utilizing the chi-squared test; while, continuous variables were analyzed using the Student's t-test. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess risk factors for infection following open or arthroscopic arthrolysis.

RESULTS

RA patients undergoing open elbow arthrolysis were older (55 vs. 49 years, p < 0.001), predominately female (61.6% vs 60.9%, p = 0.895), and likely to have chronic kidney disease (20.4 vs. 12.9%), and DM (45.2 vs. 32.2%) (both p < 0.005). Open elbow arthrolysis was also associated with higher rates of infection (31.7 vs. 4.7%) and wound complications (26.8 vs. 3.4%) (both p = 0.001). Nerve injury rates were found to be similar (8.3 vs. 9.0%, p = 0.81). On multivariable logistic regression, open elbow procedures were associated with the highest risk for infection (OR: 8.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing open arthrolysis for RA were at a higher risk of infection and wound complications compared to arthroscopic arthrolysis utilizing a nationally representative database. While there appears to be a difference in outcomes following these two procedures, higher level evidence is needed to draw more definitive conclusions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective, Level III.

Effect of the post-learning period on the accuracy and self-efficacy of measuring the joint range of motion

[Purpose] To verify the effects of the differences in the post-learning period on the accuracy and self-efficacy of measuring the range of passive flexion of the knee and elbow of students. [Participants and Methods] Thirty-six physical therapy students were classified into three groups (short-term, medium-term, and long-term) based on the interval since learning to measure the range of motion. Participants were asked to self-evaluate their efficacy in appropriately measuring the range of motion for knee and elbow flexion using a 10-point Likert scale. Subsequently, the flexion range of the left knee and elbow was measured using a universal goniometer and compared to the measurements obtained using an electronic accelerometer. [Results] Absolute errors in measuring knee flexion were significantly smaller in the medium- and long-term groups than in the short-term group. No other significant main effects or correlations were observed. [Conclusion] Although the accuracy of measuring the range of motion by students improved while they were in school, it did not improve sufficiently based on the joint being assessed. Furthermore, the post-learning period did not affect a student's self-efficacy for measuring the range of motion and did not reflect its accuracy.

Recovery From Open Osteocapsular Débridement for Primary Elbow Osteoarthritis Is Rapid and Does Not Depend on Preoperative Motion

Background and Hypothesis

Osteocapsular débridement is a surgical treatment for functionally limiting primary elbow osteoarthritis (PEOA). We hypothesized that postoperative improvement in range of motion (ROM) following elbow osteocapsular débridement could be grouped into predictable patterns. We also hypothesized that significant improvements in ROM frequently take place for up to 6 months after surgery.

Methods

A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent open elbow débridement for PEOA was performed. Demographic information and surgical approach were recorded. ROM data were also collected at preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative intervals of 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. Growth mixture modeling and latent class growth analysis were performed to identify groups of motion recovery trajectories, while Student’s t-tests were performed to compare ROM data between intervals.

Results

Our study included 76 patients who underwent open elbow débridement (9 with a lateral approach, 55 medial, and 12 both) for PEOA. The mean preoperative arc of motion was 95° ± 22°. This improved to a mean final motion arc of 127° ± 11 at final follow-up, which was 92% of the mean intraoperative arc. The mean time to achieve final motion was 3 months, with 79% of patients achieving their final ROM arc by this point. Patients achieved an average of 85% of their final arc of motion by the 2-week postoperative visit (92% of final flexion and 61% of final extension). Growth mixture modeling and latent class growth analysis did not identify any statistically significant groupings for postoperative ROM progression trajectories. Arc of motion preoperatively, intraoperatively, and at 2 weeks postoperatively did not correlate with the final arc of motion. There were no characteristics or thresholds of motion which conferred a higher likelihood of achieving a better result postoperatively.

Conclusions

ROM recovery after osteocapsular débridement for PEOA is not dependent on preoperative, intraoperative, or 2-week postoperative arcs of motion. Most of the ROM recovery occurs in the early postoperative period, with flexion restored preferentially faster than extension. The final arc of motion can be expected by 3 months postoperatively. This knowledge has potential benefit in affecting patients’ personal time commitment to rehabilitation and the overall cost for therapy and splinting beyond the 3-month time point.

Open-label phase 3 study of diclofenac conjugated to hyaluronate (diclofenac etalhyaluronate: ONO-5704/SI-613) for treatment of osteoarthritis: 1-year follow-up

Background

We evaluated the 1-year safety and efficacy of diclofenac etalhyaluronate (DF-HA), a diclofenac-conjugated hyaluronate, in patients with osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

In this multi-centre, open-label, noncomparative phase 3 study in Japan, patients with a diagnosis of knee, shoulder, elbow, hip, or ankle OA received an intra-articular (IA) injection of DF-HA 30 mg every 4 weeks for 1 year (13 times in total). The safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and target joint structural changes by X-ray imaging tests. Efficacy outcomes included joint pain scores on an 11-point numerical rating scale. Concomitant use of analgesics was not restricted.

Results

Overall, 166 eligible patients were enrolled, comprising knee OA (n = 126) and other OA (n = 40). All TEAEs were experienced by 126/166 patients (75.9%). The incidence of treatment-related TEAEs was not associated with the treatment period. No significant worsening of joint status was observed in X-ray imaging tests at week 52 or at last assessment. The mean joint pain scores (± standard deviation) were 5.9 ± 1.2, 4.9 ± 1.9, and 3.1 ± 2.3 at baseline, and weeks 2 and 52, respectively. Improvement of pain score was observed after the first injection and was maintained until week 52 regardless of knee OA or other joint OA.

Conclusions

Repeated IA injections of DF-HA every 4 weeks for 1 year were well tolerated with no clinically significant adverse events indicating they might lead to the long-term improvement of OA symptoms. DF-HA might be a useful treatment for patients with OA.

Trial registration number

JapicCTI-183855 (First registered date: 6th February 2018).

Arthroscopic and open debridement in primary elbow osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Primary osteoarthritis (OA) of the elbow can cause disabling symptoms of pain, locking, stiffness, and a limitation in the range of motion. There is no consensus regarding the role of open and arthroscopic debridement in the treatment of symptomatic primary elbow OA. The aim of this study is to systematically review the outcome of surgical debridement. A preoperative/postoperative comparison will be made between the two surgical procedures.

All studies reporting on debridement as treatment for primary elbow OA with a minimum of one-year follow-up were included. Outcome parameters were functional results, complications, and performance scores.

Data were extracted from 21 articles. The arthroscopic group consisted of 286 elbows with a weighted mean follow-up of 40 ± 17 months (range, 16–75). The open group consisted of 300 elbows with a weighted mean follow-up of 55 ± 20 months (range, 19–85). Both procedures showed improvement in Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), range of motion (ROM) flexion-extension, and ROM pronation-supination. Only in ROM flexion was a statistically significant difference in improvement seen between the groups in favour of the open group. The arthroscopic group showed improvement in pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Nothing could be stated about pain VAS scores in the open group due to a lack of data. In the arthroscopic group 18 complications (6%) were described, in the open group 29 complications (12%).

Surgical debridement is an effective treatment for the disabling symptoms of primary elbow OA with an acceptable complication rate.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:874-882. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190095

Clinical outcomes of a combined arthroscopic and mini-open Outerbridge-Kashiwagi procedure for elbow osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes of a modified Outerbridge-Kashiwagi (O-K) procedure in the treatment of elbow osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Between January 2012 and December 2016, 27 patients with elbow osteoarthritis were treated with a modified O-K procedure combining mini-open and arthroscopic technique in our institution. All patients with primary osteoarthritis and post-traumatic degenerative osteoarthritis of the elbow were included in the study if they had undergone the modified O-K procedure. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), degree of flexion, extension loss, arc of motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and radiographs.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients with a mean age of 47.2 years (range, 21-69 years) at surgery were followed up for a mean of 54.5 months (range, 27-86 months). The VAS improved from 8.0 ± 1.4 (range, 6-10) preoperatively to 1.3 ± 1.1 (range, 0-3) at the final follow-up (P < .001), degree of flexion from 115.2° ± 12.0° (range, 90°-135°) to 130.6° ± 6.3° (range, 120°-140°) (P < .001), extension loss from 31.2° ± 15.0° (range, 10°-60°) to 10.2° ± 7.7° (range, 0°-30°) (P < .001), arc of motion from 84.0° ± 18.8° (range, 55°-120°) to 120.4° ± 9.3° (range, 105°-135°) (P < .001), and MEPS from 55.8 ± 8.1 (range, 40-70) to 88.4 ± 7.2 (range, 70-100) (P < .001). Radiographs at the final follow-up showed that 9 patients (36%) had significant recurrence of bone formation within the fenestration of the olecranon fossa. One patient developed delayed-onset ulnar neuropathy, with only slight numbness in the ulnar nerve distribution 6 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified O-K procedure is safe and effective in pain relief and function restoration in patients with elbow osteoarthritis.

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.