Comparative study of patients over and under fifty years of age

INTRODUCTION

The aim of our study is to evaluate the functional and mobility outcomes in patients who have undergone arthroscopic circumferential arthrolysis of the shoulder and to find out if there are differences in the results in relation to the patient's age.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective case series of patients with idiopathic adhesive capsulitis treated by arthroscopic 360º circumferential capsulotomy in lateral position and followed for a minimum of 2 years. Range of motion (ROM), functional outcomes using the Constant Score (CS), health-related quality of life outcomes with the EuroQol Five Dimensions tool (EQ-5D), pain using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).

RESULTS

A total of 26 shoulders were included, 10 men (41.7%) and 14 women (58.3%), with 2 patients being bilateral. The mean age was 48.64 ± 7.5 years, and the mean follow-up was 50.2 months. Postoperative ROM improved significantly compared to preoperative ROM (p < 0.05). Shoulder forward flexion improved by 38.6° (95%CI 22.3-54.9, p < 0.01), abduction by 35.2° (95%CI 17.6-52.8, p < 0.01) and external rotation by 21.9° (95%CI 12.8-30.9, p < 0.01 p < 0.01). Median internal rotation improved from buttock to T12 (p < 0.01). The mean improvement in CS was 54.3 ± 24.4 points (p < 0.01). The EQ-5D and VAS scores at the end of follow-up were 0.73 ± 0.23 and 2.73 ± 2.55, respectively. There were no statistical differences between young patients and patients aged 50 years or older in ROM or functional results.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient age did not affect outcomes significantly, with patients older than 50 years showing similar results to younger patients.

Arthroscopic capsular release for frozen shoulder: when etiology matters

PURPOSE

No therapeutic intervention is universally accepted for frozen shoulder, and the most effective management to restore motion and diminish pain has yet to be defined. The aim of this study was to investigate functional and psychological outcomes in patients who underwent arthroscopic capsular release for a frozen shoulder.

METHODS

A retrospective study with prospective data collection was conducted with 78 patients suffering from frozen shoulder resistance to conservative treatment. Considering the etiology, there were 36 (46.2%) idiopathic, 31 (39.7%) postoperative, and 11 (14.1%) posttraumatic cases. Preoperatively, each patient was evaluated with the range of motion (ROM) assessment and the Constant-Murley score (CMS). At follow-up, the 4-point subjective satisfaction scale (SSS), the ROM assessment, the SF-12 questionnaire, the numerical rating scale (NRS) for the subjective assessment of pain, the CMS and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were assessed.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 54.2 ± 22.3 months, ROM and CMS showed a statistically significant improvement between pre- and postoperative values (all p < 0.001). Before surgery, the mean CMS was 36.9% that of sex- and age-matched healthy individuals, and all patients showed a CMS lower than the normative data. At the final follow-up visit, the mean CMS was 99.9% that of sex- and age-matched healthy individuals, and 49 (62.8%) patients showed a CMS equal to or higher than the normative data. The mean increase in the CMS was 56.1 ± 8.3 points. The mean SSS, HADS-A, HADS-D, and NRS were 3.7 ± 0.5, 2.5 ± 1.6, 2.2 ± 1.3, and 2.2 ± 1.0, respectively. All patients returned to their previous level of work and sports activity after 2 and 2.5 months, respectively. The multivariate analysis showed the association between a higher postoperative CMS and the idiopathic etiology of a frozen shoulder (p = 0.004, β = 3.971). No intraoperative complications occurred. Postoperatively, four patients (5.1%) were treated with intra-articular steroid injections to manage residual symptoms. One patient (1.3%) with a postoperative frozen shoulder showed persistent symptoms and underwent a new successful arthroscopic capsular release.

CONCLUSION

High patient satisfaction and statistically significant ROM and CMS recovery can be achieved after arthroscopic capsular release to manage frozen shoulder. Better functional outcomes are expected when the etiology is idiopathic. Results can help surgeons identify the patients who will most benefit from surgery and should be discussed with the patient.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Management of shoulder stiffness following rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The purpose was to systematically review and synthesize the literature on treatment modalities for shoulder stiffness following rotator cuff repair (RCR) and investigate which modality provides the greatest postoperative range of motion (ROM). A search was performed on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Clinical case series and comparative studies that report pre- and posttreatment ROM of shoulder stiffness following RCR were included. Studies that exclusively assess idiopathic frozen shoulder or primary shoulder stiffness were excluded. Five eligible studies that reported on a total of 177 patients who underwent treatment for shoulder stiffness following RCR were included. The ranges of postoperative ROM following arthroscopic capsular release were 158°-166° for active forward elevation (AFE) and 53°-59° for external rotation (ER). The ranges of postoperative ROM following infiltration were 146°-163° for AFE and 34°-35° for ER. The ranges of postoperative ROM following rehabilitation were 166° for AFE and 62° for ER. For AFE, 4 studies (5 data sets) were eligible for meta-analysis, which indicated better AFE when treated with a mean difference (MD) of 5.10° with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, CI, 0.83-9.38). For ER, 3 studies (4 data sets) were eligible for meta-analysis, which indicated better ER without treatment with an MD of 4.59° with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, CI, -7.04 to -2.13). For the treatment of shoulder stiffness following RCR, all included treatments improved the ROM, resulting in comparable AFE and ER compared to the comparative group. Among the treatment modalities, arthroscopic capsular release granted the greatest posttreatment AFE, while rehabilitation granted the greatest posttreatment ER.

Intra-articular celecoxib improves knee extension regardless of surgical release in a rabbit model of arthrofibrosis

Aims

Outcomes of current operative treatments for arthrofibrosis after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are not consistently positive or predictable. Pharmacological in vivo studies have focused mostly on prevention of arthrofibrosis. This study used a rabbit model to evaluate intra-articular (IA) effects of celecoxib in treating contracted knees alone, or in combination with capsular release.

Methods

A total of 24 rabbits underwent contracture-forming surgery with knee immobilization followed by remobilization surgery at eight weeks. At remobilization, one cohort underwent capsular release (n = 12), while the other cohort did not (n = 12). Both groups were divided into two subcohorts (n = 6 each) – one receiving IA injections of celecoxib, and the other receiving injections of vehicle solution (injections every day for two weeks after remobilization). Passive extension angle (PEA) was assessed in live rabbits at 10, 16, and 24 weeks, and disarticulated limbs were analyzed for capsular stiffness at 24 weeks.

Results

IA celecoxib resulted in greater mean PEA at ten weeks (69.6° (SD 4.6) vs 45.2° (SD 9.6), p = 0.004), 16 weeks (109.8° (SD 24.2) vs 60.9° (SD10.9), p = 0.004), and 24 weeks (101.0° (SD 8.0) vs 66.3° (SD 5.8), p = 0.004). Capsular stiffness was significantly reduced with IA celecoxib (2.72 Newton per cm (N·cm)/° (SD 1.04), p = 0.008), capsular release (2.41 N·cm/° (SD 0.80), p = 0.008), and capsular release combined with IA celecoxib (3.56 N·cm/° (SD 0.99), p = 0.018) relative to IA vehicle (6.09 N·cm/° (SD 1.64)).

Conclusion

IA injections of a celecoxib led to significant improvements in passive extension angles, with reduced capsular stiffness, when administered to rabbit knees with established experimental contracture. Celecoxib was superior to surgical release, and the combination of celecoxib and a surgical release did not provide any additional value.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(1):32–39.

Arthroscopic capsular release to treat idiopathic frozen shoulder: How much release is needed?

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to provide consensus regarding the degree of optimal extended arthroscopic capsular release in addition to a standard rotator interval release in the treatment of idiopathic frozen shoulder.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. All articles that reported the outcomes of capsular release in idiopathic frozen shoulder were included. A total of 18 articles with 629 patients and 811 shoulders were included. Clinical outcomes analysed include differences between pre and postoperative ranges of motion (ROM), Visual Analog Score (VAS) reduction, Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores and Constant scores. Patients were grouped by technique: anterior-inferior capsular release (Group 1), anterior-inferior-posterior capsular release (Group 2), and 360-degree capsular release (Group 3) at follow up points 3,6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

Comparing ROM, Group 1 had greater early abduction (p<0.01), early (p<0.01) and overall external rotation (p<0.01) than Group 2, as well as greater early flexion (p<0.01), early abduction (p<0.01), early (p<0.01) and overall internal rotation (p<0.01) than Group 3. Group 2 had greater early (p=0.03) and overall flexion (p<0.01) than Group 1, as well as greater early (p<0.01) and overall flexion (p<0.01), early abduction (p<0.01) and early internal rotation (p<0.01) than Group 3. Group 3 had greater overall flexion (p<0.01) than Group 1 and greater overall external rotation (p<0.01) than Group 2. Comparing VAS scores, the less extensive releases saw the greatest significant postoperative reduction. Group 2 had greater mean improvements in postoperative Constant scores than Group 1 (p<0.01) and Group 3 (p<0.01), while SST scores were significantly higher in Group 1 (p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that less extensive releases may result in better functional and pain scores. Addition of a posterior release offers increased early internal rotation, which was not sustained over time, but provides early and sustained flexion improvements. A complete 360 release may not provide any further benefit. There were no significant differences in the complication rates amongst the 3 techniques.

LEVEL OF STUDY

II; Meta-analysis and systematic review.

Can manipulation under anesthesia alone provide clinical outcomes similar to arthroscopic circumferential capsular release in primary frozen shoulder (FS)?: the necessity of arthroscopic capsular release in primary FS

Background

We evaluated the need for arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) in refractory primary frozen shoulder (FS) by comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated with ACR and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA).

Methods

We assessed patients with refractory primary FS, 57 patients (group A) who were treated with MUA and 22 patients (group B) who were treated with ACR. In group A, manipulation including a backside arm-curl maneuver was performed under interscalene brachial block. In group B, manipulation was performed only to release the inferior capsule before arthroscopic circumferential capsular release, which was carried out for the unreleased capsule after manipulation. Pain, range of shoulder motion, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score were recorded at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. We compared outcome variables between treatment groups and between diabetics and non-diabetics and also evaluated the numbers of patients receiving additional intra-articular steroid injection.

Results

Outcome variables at 3 months after surgery and improvements in outcome variables did not differ between groups. Group A showed significantly better results than group B in the evaluation of pain and range of motion at 1 week. Diabetics showed comparable outcomes to non-diabetics for most variables. Eleven patients required additional steroid injections between 8 to 16 weeks after surgery: 12.2% in group A, 18.2% in group B. Additional injections were given three times more often in diabetics compared to non-diabetics.

Conclusions

MUA alone can yield similar clinical outcomes to ACR in refractory FS.

Is single stage capsular release and rotator cuff repair suitable for rotator tears with concomitant stiffness?

Introduction

It is common for patients with a rotator cuff tear to present with shoulder stiffness. There is no consensus on the acceptable level of stiffness at time of rotator cuff repair.We aim to determine if patients with stiffness undergoing rotator cuff repair and concomitant capsular release have different outcome than those with no stiffness undergoing rotator cuff repair alone. We hypothesize that patients with stiffness will not have poorer outcome than patients with no stiffness.

Method

We conducted a retrospective study of prospectively collected data for 47 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair under a single surgeon from 2010 to 2015. 25 patients were considered stiff (Stiff group) and 22 patients were considered to have no pre-operative stiffness (Non-stiff group).Range of motion and functional outcomes were collected preoperatively and post-operatively at two-years.

Results

There were no significant differences in gender distribution, age and cuff tear size between both groups. Pre-operatively, patients in the Stiff group had significantly poorer active range of motion (Forward flexion - Stiff 74.8° vs Non-stiff 100.2°, P = 0.001) and poorer function (Constant score - Stiff 23.5 vs Non-stiff 43.2, P < 0.001). Post-operatively, both groups of patients had increased range of motion, strength and reported lesser pain compared to pre-operation. There were no significant differences in post-operative outcomes between both groups.

Conclusion

Single-stage surgery combining capsular release and rotator cuff repair is effective for patients with stiffness as they are able to achieve similar results to those without shoulder stiffness.

Functional outcome of single stage capsular release and rotator cuff repair for cuff tear in periarthritic shoulder

Rotator cuff tear and periarthritic shoulder is a concomitant condition. In this study, both were managed with single stage arthroscopic Capsular release and rotator cuff repair and its functional outcome was evaluated till one year postoperatively. 58 patients diagnosed clinically, radiologically by MRI and arthroscopically were included. Mean constant shoulder score preoperatively was 32.6 and at one year postoperatively 78.5. Mean SPADI preoperatively was 72.1% which decreased to 20.7% at one year postoperatively. These improvements were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Thus this single stage procedure is effective for patients having rotator cuff tear in periarthritic shoulder.

Arthroscopic capsular release and continuous upper arm brachial block in frozen shoulder - A midterm outcome analysis

OBJECTIVE

This prospective study aims to evaluate the efficacy of Continuous upper arm brachial block (modified interscalene block) with an arthroscopic capsular release in the outcome of resistant frozen shoulder cases.

METHODS

We studied 123 patients who underwent arthroscopic capsular release and subacromial decompression for resistant frozen shoulder cases between June 2016 and July 2019. Postoperative analgesia was provided with Continuous upper arm brachial block and ambulatory patient-controlled analgesia pump for 2-3 weeks. The patients were started on regular physiotherapy on the first postoperative day. All the patients were followed up at 3rd week, 6th week, 3rdmonth, 6th month, 1st year, and 2nd year with VAS and Constant-Murley scores.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up period of 18 months, there was a statistically significant improvement in the range of motion, VAS scores, and Constant-Murley scores postoperatively (p < .01). None of the cases required postoperative opioid administration for pain control. Minor neurological complications like recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy and Horner's syndrome were seen in few cases that resolved with titration of the drug dose.

CONCLUSION

Our study verifies the use of continuous upper arm brachial block (CUABB) with a portable infusion pump for 2-3 weeks in arthroscopic capsular release for resistant frozen shoulder cases. It significantly reduced postoperative pain in the initial two weeks that aided with early recovery of the shoulder movements and functions without an increased incidence of acute or chronic neurologic complications.

Capsular release following total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of early outcomes

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to analyze the outcomes of open and arthroscopic capsular release following total shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

Over 15 years, 19 patients experienced persistent shoulder stiffness after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty refractory to nonoperative treatment, requiring either open (n = 5) or arthroscopic (n = 14) capsular release. There were seven (39%) patients who had a prior diagnosis of stiffness before the primary arthroplasty.

RESULTS

At a follow-up of 2.3 years (1-5.5), there were changes in range of motion, including forward flexion (77°-117°), abduction (49°-98°), external rotation (9°-19°), internal rotation at 0° (Sacrum to L1), and pain (4.1-2.3) scores (p < 0.01). There were seven (37%) patients that required a reoperation following the initial capsular release. The survival-free of reoperation at 2 and 5 years was 76% and 53%, respectively, while the survival-free of revision surgery at 2 and 5 years was 83%. Furthermore, three (16%) patients required a repeat capsular release. Overall, there were 11 (58%) complications, including stiffness (n = 9), infection (n = 1), subscapularis rupture (n = 2), glenoid loosening (n = 3), and pain with weakness requiring reoperation (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Shoulder stiffness after total shoulder arthroplasty is a very difficult pathology to treat, with high rates of complications and reoperations after capsular release. Overall, in patients that do not develop glenoid loosening, capsular release does improve the patient's pain and shoulder motion. Furthermore, when patients develop stiffness, it is critical to rule out other etiologies, such as glenoid loosening, prior to proceeding with capsular release.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

Retrospective case series.

Early Clinical Outcomes of Manipulation under Anesthesia for Refractory Adhesive Capsulitis: Comparison with Arthroscopic Capsular Release

Backgroud

The purpose of this study was to compare early clinical outcomes of manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) and arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) in patients with refractory adhesive capsulitis (AC).

Methods

Thirty AC patients who underwent MUA (MUA group) were included. As a control group, thirty AC patients who underwent ACR (ACR group) were matched for age and sex with the MUA group. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, American shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and range of motion (ROM) were evaluated preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months after procedure.

Results

Both groups had significant improvements in the VAS pain score, ASES score, and ROM at 12 months after procedure. VAS pain score and ASES score were significantly better in the MUA group than in the ACR group at 3 months after procedure. Mean forward flexion was significantly greater in the MUA group than in the ACR group at 3 months after procedure. Mean external rotation and internal rotation were significantly greater in the MUA group than in the ACR group at 3, 6, and 12 months after procedure. Two patients required additional steroid injections at 3 and 6 months after MUA because of recurrent stiffness with pain.

Conclusions

Compared with ACR, MUA provided equivalent clinical outcomes in the early period after procedure. Our study suggests that MUA is a useful option to be considered as treatment for refractory AC before choosing ACR.

Comparison of outcomes following arthroscopic capsular release for idiopathic, diabetic and secondary shoulder adhesive capsulitis: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Arthroscopic capsular release for adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder is a treatment option. The present study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes following arthroscopic capsular release among idiopathic, diabetic and secondary adhesive capsulitis.

HYPOTHESIS

Different aetiological groups yield variable outcomes following arthroscopic capsular release.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Database in April 2017. Comparative studies that reported range of motion or functional outcomes following arthroscopic capsular release in patients with adhesive capsulitis were included. A systematic review of the studies was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Six studies met the eligibility criteria. The overall population included 463 patients; 203 idiopathic, 61 diabetic and 199 secondary cases. Of four studies comparing idiopathic and diabetic patients, three reported significantly worse range of movement and function in the diabetic group at various follow up points. No significant difference in function and motion was reported between the idiopathic and secondary groups. Recurrent pain was highest in diabetic patients (26%) compared to idiopathic groups (0%) and the secondary group had a higher rate of revision surgery when compared to the idiopathic group (8.1% vs. 2.4%) DISCUSSION: Arthroscopic capsular release has a high success rate regardless of the underlying aetiology. However, diabetic patients are reported to have more residual pain, reduced motion and inferior function compared to idiopathic cases. The rate of revision capsular release is higher among patients with post-surgical adhesive capsulitis when compared to idiopathic cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, systematic review.

Comparison of one-stage versus two-stage procedure for the management of patients with rotator cuff tear and concomitant shoulder stiffness

Background

To compare the clinical outcomes of one-stage and two-stage procedures for the management of patients with rotator cuff tear and concomitant shoulder stiffness.

Methods

From December 2013 to June 2016, we recruited 42 consecutive patients with rotator cuff tear and concomitant shoulder stiffness. Twenty-two patients underwent a one-stage procedure, including arthroscopic capsule release and concomitant rotator cuff repair, within 2 weeks of the diagnosis. For the remaining twenty patients, conservative treatment for the recovery of range of motion (ROM) was initially performed before arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The ROM, visual analogue scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant-Murley score, and satisfaction rate were assessed preoperatively; 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery; and at final follow-up.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 26.3 months (range, 24–33 months). No significant difference was noted in preoperative demographic data (age, sex, dominant/non-dominant, diabetes mellitus, thyroid disease, and duration of symptoms) between the two groups (P = 0.165, P = 0.580, P = 0.662, P = 0.716, P = 0.231, and P = 0.152, respectively). After treatment, all patients exhibited significant improvement in ROM and functional scores (P = 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively). At 3 months postoperatively, the two-stage group exhibited significantly improved forward flexion and internal rotation compared with the one-stage group (P = 0.001 and P = 0.038, respectively). No significant difference in ROM was noted between the two groups at 6, 12, 24 months postoperatively and the final follow-up. In addition, no significant differences in VAS, ASES, Constant-Murley score and satisfaction rate were noted between the two groups at final follow-up (P = 0.319, P = 0.529, P = 0.711, and P = 0.085, respectively).

Conclusion

In the treatment of rotator cuff tear with concomitant stiffness, although the recovery of ROM took longer in patients who underwent the one-stage procedure, satisfactory results at final follow-up can be achieved using either the one-stage procedure or two-stage procedure.

Study design

Case-control study.

Clinical Outcome after Arthroscopic Capsular Release for Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder

Background

This study was undertaken to evaluate the outcome of the arthroscopic capsular release for adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder.

Methods

This study retrospectively investigated thirty shoulders in 29 patients who presented with recalcitrant adhesive capsulitis and underwent arthroscopic treatments. Other than typical findings of adhesive capsulitis, combined pathologies in the glenohumeral joint and subacromial space were evaluated by arthroscopy. Clinical evaluations were performed using the Constant’s score and ranges of motion (ROM) at preoperative, 6 months postoperatively and at the final follow-up.

Results

Our study included 17 women and 12 men with a mean age of 53.8 years (range, 34–74). Mean follow-up duration was 24 months (range, 12–40 months). Assessment of combined pathologies revealed that partial rotator cuff tear of less than 25% thickness, was most common (overall 83.3%; with bursal 57% and articular 23%). Subacromial synovitis and adhesion were also frequent (53.3%). The Constant score and ranges of motion significantly improved at the final follow-up, compared with preoperative levels. However, clinical results at 6 months postoperatively were found to be significantly inferior to those observed at the final follow-up (p≤0.001 for all factors). Functional impairment was the major complaint in 59.3% patients at the 6 months follow-up.

Conclusions

Although arthroscopic capsular release yielded favorable outcome at the mean 24 months follow-up, pain and motion limitations at 6-month postoperatively persisted in more than 50% of our patients. While combined pathologies were commonly encountered during arthroscopy, although their effects on surgical outcome in adhesive capsulitis remains unclear in this study.

Frozen shoulder - A prospective randomized clinical trial

AIM

To compare the results of arthroscopic capsular release with intra-articular steroid injections in patients of frozen shoulder.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients with frozen shoulder were randomised to one of two treatment groups: Group 1, complete 360 degree arthroscopic capsular release and group 2, intra-articular corticosteroid injection (40 mg methyl prednisolone acetate). Both groups were put on active and passive range of motion exercises following the intervention. The outcome parameters were visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain, range of motion and Constant score which were measured at baseline, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 wk after intervention.

RESULTS

All the parameters improved in both the groups. The mean VAS score improved significantly more in the group 1 as compared to group 2 at 8 wk. This greater improvement was maintained at 20 wk with P value of 0.007 at 8 wk, 0.006 at 12 wk, 0.006 at 16 wk and 0.019 at 20 wk. The Constant score showed a more significant improvement in group 1 compared to group 2 at 4 wk, which was again maintained at 20 wk with P value of 0.01 at 4, 8, 12 and 16 wk. The gain in abduction movement was statistically significantly more in arthroscopy group with P value of 0.001 at 4, 8, 12, 16 wk and 0.005 at 20 wk. The gain in external rotation was statistically significantly more in arthroscopy group with P value of 0.007 at 4 wk, 0.001 at 8, 12, and 16 wk and 0.003 at 20 wk. There was no statistically significant difference in extension and internal rotation between the two groups at any time.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic capsular release provides subjective and objective improvement earlier than intra-articular steroid injection.

Capsular release around the intercondylar notch increases the extension gap in posterior-stabilized rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

In posterior-stabilized (PS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA), various post-cam designs can be used. A larger cam of the femoral component may tighten the extension gap. Few studies have investigated the relationship between capsular release around the intercondylar notch and the extension gap. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of capsular release around the intercondylar notch on the extension gap.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients (54 knees) who underwent PS rotating-platform TKA (PFC Sigma RP-F) were enrolled retrospectively. We measured the extension gap with and without a femoral trial using a knee balancer, applying a joint distraction force of 44lb. When an intraoperative flexion contracture of >5° persisted, we performed a capsular release approximately 10mm cranial to the intercondylar notch. After full knee extension was achieved, the extension gap was measured again.

RESULTS

Thirty knees required capsular release. With a trial, the medial and lateral differences between the extension gaps before and after capsular release were 1.7mm (p<0.0001) and 2.3mm (p<0.0001), respectively. Without a trial, the gaps were enlarged by 0.4mm (p=0.0452) and 0.6mm (p=0.0215), respectively. Twenty-four knees did not require release. No significant differences were noted in the range of motion at one-year follow-up between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

With PS rotating-platform TKA, capsular release around the intercondylar notch is found to increase the extension gap and may prevent postoperative flexion contracture.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Arthroscopic capsular release and manipulation under anaesthesia for frozen shoulders: A hot topic

A frozen shoulder is a common cause of shoulder pain and stiffness. The etiology and pathology of frozen shoulders is not fully understood yet. Frozen shoulder is characterized by a decrease in intra-articular volume and capsular compliance. This can lead to significant limitations in daily life. The majority of the patients can be treated conservatively, with functional recovery to be expected in two to three years. However, if conservative treatment fails, manipulation under anaesthesia and arthroscopic capsular release can both be considered as appropriate treatments. Manipulation is a traditionally well-established technique but in recent years it seems that arthroscopic capsular release has gained popularity. Manipulation is a relative time efficient and technically low-demanding procedure in which the glenohumeral joint is forced into different directions under general anaesthesia to release the capsular contracture, thereby increasing the range of motion of the joint. In arthroscopic capsular release the glenohumeral capsule can be released in a more controlled manner under direct vision. There are no prospective comparative trials available to display superiority of one procedure over the other. In addition, the optimal timing of both these interventions still has to be determined. An overview of the literature concerning this topic and a description of both procedures with its own advantages and disadvantages is provided.