Elbow Arthroscopy Research Articles

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

BackgroundToday, intra-articular and juxta-articular osteoid osteomas are treated with arthroscopy and radiofrequency thermal ablation. However, for the case of an elbow joint, arguments are made for the use of a minimally invasive technique to be the optimal choice. This study aims to analyse our experiences of arthroscopically treated elbow osteoid osteomas and to compare it with the published results of both techniques.MethodsThe retrospective study analyses the patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy ablation of an elbow osteoid osteoma at a single institution from January 2014 until March 2020. Clinical and diagnostic features, success and treatment failure rates, complications and tumour recurrence rates were all compared to 13 studies of intra-articular elbow osteoid osteoma arthroscopic ablation and 15 studies involving radiofrequency thermal ablation of intra-articular osteoid osteoma within different joints.ResultsFour males and two females, with a mean age of 19.3 years, were encompassed. All the patients had immediate postoperative pain relief and improved range of motion. No tumour recurrences were observed during a median of 21.7 months. The literature review yielded 86.4% success rate, 68.2% successful biopsies, one minor complication and no recurrences following the arthroscopic ablation of an elbow osteoid osteoma; while radiofrequency thermal ablation of an intra-articular elbow osteoid osteoma yielded 96.3% success rate, 33.3% successful biopsies, no complications and 3.7% recurrence rate.ConclusionsOur results are consistent with the published literature proving that arthroscopic ablation is an efficient method with low treatment failure rates and no recurrences in treating intra- and juxta-articular elbow osteoid osteomas. Advantages of arthroscopic ablation stem from the ability to visualise and safely deal with the lesion and the joint’s reactive changes resulting in high biopsy rates, no recurrences and better postoperative elbow’s range of motion. Still, the technique selection should be personalised considering the medical expertise of every institution.

The AAOS 2019 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Rotator Cuff Injuries Are Unbiased and Incorporate a Diverse Body of Literature

PurposeTo analyze the scientific research that formed the basis of the 2019 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) clinical practice guidelines for the management of rotator cuff injuries.MethodsAll studies cited in the 2019 AAOS clinical practice guidelines for the management of rotator cuff injuries were extracted and categorized. Extracted data included type of study, number of patients, level of evidence, journal of publication, impact factor, year of publication, country of origin, contributing authors, affiliated institutions, and significant findings. Data were analyzed to determine time from publication to implementation, level of evidence, and frequency of cited journals and authors.ResultsThe studies cited in the guideline included 15,130 patients from 140 studies published between 1994 and 2018. The overall mean time from article publication to 2019 AAOS clinical practice guidelines was 4.76 ± 2.23 years. Of articles published in 2010 to 2019, 64 studies were cited in the strong recommendation strength subcategory, and 57 articles were cited in the moderate recommendation strength subcategory. Articles published in Journal of Shoulder & Elbow Surgery and Arthroscopy were cited most frequently. The most frequent authors were J. H. Oh, R. Z. Tashjian, S. H. Kim, N. Maffulli, and J. C. Yoo.ConclusionsThe 2019 AAOS CPG reference a diverse number of journals and authors, appearing to be impartial. Furthermore, prompt time from publication to implementation in the Guidelines indicates that it is possible to influence clinical guidelines with recent work.Clinical RelevanceAn analysis of the scientific research that forms the basis of the AAOS Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Rotator Cuff Injuries can provide valuable information about the quality of the Guidelines.

Proximal Abduction Ulnar Osteotomy (PAUL): Short- and Long-Term Evaluation in Dogs Presenting Medial Compartment Disease.

Simple SummaryDevelopmental elbow disease is one of the main causes of lameness in the canine species and occurs often in large and giant breed dogs. The most frequent manifestation of this pathology is known as medial compartment disease due to a physiological overload in the medial region of the elbow. It is considered as a complex disease and the treatment is focused on relieving the pain and slowing the progression of osteoarthritis. The Proximal Abduction Ulnar Osteotomy (PAUL) technique is one of the newest techniques whose purpose is the transmission of loads from the medial to the lateral compartment. In this prospective case series, the authors use the combination of elbow arthroscopy and the PAUL technique and report a significant improvement in clinical signs, showing a low major complications rate with a high degree of owner satisfaction.The aim of the study is to report the results obtained from performing a Proximal Abduction Ulnar Osteotomy (PAUL) technique in a cohort of dogs with medial compartment disease with short- and long-term follow-up, assessing the perception of the owners and describing the long-term complications associated with the technique. This is a clinical prospective study, including dogs diagnosed with medial compartment disease treated with elbow arthroscopy and PAUL between 2013 and 2020. Long-term follow-up data and postoperative complications were registered, and a questionnaire adapted from Fitzpatrick et al. 2009 was collected from owners. Thirty-three elbows in 26 dogs were included. The duration of follow-up ranged from 4 to 61 months (median: 24.76 months). At the end of the study, 73.1% of the owners reported excellent satisfaction and 74.1% of the owners would repeat the surgery in the same circumstances. The owner questionnaire showed a greater capacity to walk and run, without lameness and pain, and climb up and down stairs a year after surgery, being constant at the end of the study. Major postoperative complications were documented in 4/33 elbows (12.12%), including delayed union, implant failure, and osteophytosis of the medial aspect of the coronoid process. In conclusion, elbow arthroscopy and the PAUL technique achieved an evident improvement in the quality of life of patients with great satisfaction for most of the owners.

Complications in Elbow Arthroscopy: Management and Prevention.

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

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

To determine the complications from elbow arthroscopy for the past 16years, and to summarize the most reported safety techniques and risk factors. Eligibility criteria included level I to IV evidence articles that were published after 2005 in the English language. Excluded were vet, paediatric, and cadaver studies. Open and arthroscopic-assisted elbow procedures were not included. Two online databases were comprehensively searched (PubMed and PMC) in April 2021. Relevant paper selection was conducted by two independent reviewers. MINORS score, demographic properties, indications, procedure type, complication rates, reoperation rates, reported risk factors, and safety techniques were recorded. Fifty-two articles met the criteria and were included. No relevant level I to II evidence studies were discovered. The mean age ranged from 31 to 65years. The average body mass indexes were between 26 and over 40kg/m2. There was a prevalence of male sex (from 50.2 to 79.2%). Most of the studies reported a minimum follow-up (range, 4weeks-12months). The most common arthroscopic procedure was debridement (up to 73% in Leong et al.'s study). The average MINORS score was 12 (range, 10-16). The total complications rate ranged from 1.5 to 11%, with a few studies reporting over 25%. Nerve injury rate was 1.26-7.5%. Re-operation rate ranged from none (100 procedures) to 11.8%. Elbow arthroscopy is a successful procedure with a low overall complications rate (from 1.5 to 11%), and a low nerve injury rate (from 1.26 to 7.5%). Risk factors include patient-related factors (obesity, female sex, age over 65years, elevated blood sugar levels, hypercoagulable disorder, tobacco and alcohol use), preoperative elbow impairment/previous surgery, and periprocedural steroid injections. Our review discovered a re-operation rate of 2 to 18%.

Arthroscopic diagnosis and treatment of intra-articular injuries of the elbow joint in children

Experience in elbow arthroscopy in children (36 patients, 5-16 years) was presented in native literature for the first time. Diagnostic arthroscopy was performed in 4 cases, diagnostic arthroscopy + miniarthrotomy in 3 cases, diagnostic and operative arthroscopy in 29 cases. Comparative assessment of radiologic, ultrasound, CT and arthroscopic data showed evident preference of arthroscopy for the diagnosis of intra-articular elbow injuries in children. Main and additional portals decreasing the probability of neurovascular structure injury were suggested. The technique of diagnostic and operative arthroscopy was determined. The indications for the elbow arthroscopy in children were defined. In 91.7% of patients the positive outcomes with complete or almost complete restoration of elbow function were achieved.

Wide variability of shoulder and elbow case volume in orthopedic surgery residency.

Despite the growing popularity of certain shoulder and elbow procedures (eg, shoulder arthroplasty), resident exposure to these surgeries remains unclear. This study sought to evaluate trends in graduating orthopedic resident case volumes of commonly performed shoulder and elbow procedures. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) surgical case log data from 2016 to 2020 for graduating US orthopedic surgery residents was assessed. Procedures of the shoulder and humerus/elbow were categorized into predefined ACGME categories: repair/revision/reconstruction, fracture/dislocation, and arthroscopy. The average number of cases performed per resident in each of these categories was directly compared from 2016 to 2020. The 10th and 90th percentiles of case volumes within each category of procedures was compared from 2016 and2020. There was a 31% increase in the number of shoulder repair/revision/reconstruction cases between 2016 and 2020 (average: 27.5 to 36.1; P < .001), followed by a 23% increase for elbow fracture/dislocation (24.4 to 30; P < .001), 21% increase for elbow repair/revision/reconstruction (10.6 to 12.8; P < .001), and 16% increase for shoulder arthroscopy (69 to 79.7; P < .001). No significant changes were found for shoulder fracture/dislocation and elbow arthroscopy. There was a wide case volume variability for each procedure, particularly for shoulder repair/revision/reconstruction, where there was a nearly 5-fold difference in the number of cases performed between the 10th and 90th percentiles of residents in 2020 (13 vs. 62 cases, respectively). The case category shoulder repair/revision/reconstruction has seen the largest relative increase in the shoulder and elbow case volume of graduating orthopedic surgery residents, most likely reflecting the national rising trends of shoulder arthroplasty. However, our study shows that there is wide variability in resident exposure to these cases. Implementation of shoulder arthroplasty case minimum requirements might help reduce case variability and discrepancies in resident education.

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

BackgroundElbow arthroscopy is becoming increasingly important for the treatment of a wide range of acute and chronic elbow pathologies. Even if elbow arthroscopy is technically demanding, in the pediatric population this minimally invasive technique is preferred by many surgeons for the treatment of pathologies such as osteochondritis dissecans (OCD), posttraumatic stiffness (PTS), or elbow posterior impingement (PI). The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes and safety of elbow arthroscopy in the pediatric and adolescent population after long-term follow-up.Materials and methodsIn this retrospective study, 26 patients younger than 18 years old undergoing elbow arthroscopy were evaluated. All surgeries were performed by a single senior surgeon. Patients were divided into three subgroups based on preoperative diagnosis: OCD, PTS, and PI. After at least 60 months follow-up, several outcome measures, including range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and visual analog scale (VAS) were evaluated in relation to preoperative values. The level of patient satisfaction on a five-level Likert scale, any limitation or change in sport activity, and the onset of any possible complications were also evaluated.ResultsIn the study population, we found an improvement in ROM (flexion of 14.4 ± 13.6°, extension of 19.5 ± 13.9°, pronation of 5.8 ± 5.7°, and supination of 8.5 ± 11.6°) and in validated outcome measures (MEPS of 21.0 ± 13.5 points and VAS of 3.8 ± 2.2 points). The satisfaction rate was 4.5, with no dissatisfaction. Eighty-seven percent of patients fully recovered their performance levels, 9% changed sport, and 4% were unable to return to sport. We identified one major and one minor complication, with an overall complication rate of 7.7%. No neurovascular injuries were detected.ConclusionsElbow arthroscopy in a pediatric population can be considered an effective and safe procedure for selected pathologies when performed by an experienced surgeon. At long-term follow-up, we reported excellent clinical outcomes (both objective and subjective), with a relatively low complication rate without permanent injuries.Level of evidenceLevel IV—case series.

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

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to describe the placement and evaluate the safety of the far anterior proximal and distal anteromedial portals by comparing them to previously defined portal techniques in a cadaveric model of the elbow.MethodsSix paired (left and right) fresh, frozen cadaveric elbow joints were dissected. .62-mm Kirschner wires were placed at the literature-defined distal and proximal portal sites on right elbows. The proposed “far anterior” distal and proximal portals were established on the matched left elbows. The elbows were dissected to display the median and ulnar nerves. Digital calipers were used to measure distances from wires to nerves.ResultsFor the distal portal, the literature-defined portals were a significantly greater distance (P = .014) from the ulnar nerve (31.22 mm) compared to the far anterior portals (24.65 mm). For the proximal portal, the far anterior portals were a significantly greater distance (P = .026) from the ulnar nerve (26.98 mm) than the literature-defined portals (13.75 mm). There was no significant difference between the far anterior and literature-defined proximal and distal portal techniques in relation to the median nerve.ConclusionsAnalysis of elbow arthroscopy anteromedial portal technique shows the far, anterior, proximal, and distal portals are a safe distance from the ulnar and median nerves. A portal modification that may address complicated elbow conditions is a more anterior placement of the medial portals to allow for better visualization and access.Clinical RelevanceThe elbow is a difficult joint in which to perform arthroscopic surgery. One option our institution has used for safe portal modification to address complicated elbow conditions is a further anterior placement of the medial portals to allow better visualization and access.

Arthroscopic management of elbow stiffness

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

Midterm outcomes and survivorship of arthroscopic elbow debridement: a comparison of posttraumatic versus primary degenerative osteoarthritis.

BackgroundArthroscopic debridement is an effective means of surgical management of both degenerative osteoarthritis (DOA) and posttraumatic arthritis (PTA) of the elbow. However, the difference in the efficacy and longevity of this procedure when performed for these two distinct pathologies remains in question. The purpose of this study was to identify and compare the midterm outcomes and survivorship of arthroscopic debridement of elbow PTA and DOA.MethodsA retrospective analysis of patients undergoing arthroscopic debridement of DOA and PTA of the elbow was performed. A questionnaire containing the Oxford Elbow Score, as well as questions regarding the incidence of reoperation, additional nonoperative intervention, complications, pain, and satisfaction, was given at 5 years, minimum, after surgery. The midterm survivorship of arthroscopic debridement free of reoperation for any reason, as well as the remaining outcome measurements obtained via the questionnaire and in-office evaluation, was compared between PTA and DOA cohorts.ResultsEighty patients (DOA = 36, PTA = 44) were included in this study for analysis. All 36 patients with DOA were noted to be male. Follow-up time at the date of questionnaire response was 7.9 years (range, 5.6-11.8) in the DOA cohort and 8.6 years (range, 5.7-12.7) in the PTA cohort. Reoperation rates of 5.6% and 11.4% were identified in the DOA and PTA cohorts, respectively. No statistical difference was noted in reoperation rate, survivorship, or any measured patient-reported outcomes between cohorts at the final follow-up visit. Both cohorts demonstrated a significant improvement in Visual Analog Scale pain scores (P < .001) and ROM. Postoperative ROM was obtained at the final clinic visit at an average follow-up duration of 151 days and 255 days in the DOA and PTA cohorts, respectively. However, no difference in the degree of improvement in either outcome variable was identified after a comparison between cohorts.ConclusionArthroscopic debridement is an equally efficacious treatment option for DOA and PTA of the elbow. Patients with either pathology can expect satisfactory elbow function and an improvement in pain with little chance of reoperation at the midterm of the follow-up duration.

Outcomes of Arthroscopic Elbow Contracture Release: Improvement for Severe Prosupination and Flexion Contracture

The purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes following arthroscopic elbow contracture release to describe the use of arthroscopy for improvement in extension/flexion and pronation/supination arcs of motion at a single institution for degenerative and posttraumatic etiologies. Consecutive arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis performed between 2003 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Basic patient demographics, indications for surgery, preoperative and postoperative elbow range of motion, postoperative patient outcome score, and all complications were recorded and analyzed. Fifty-two patients were included with an average follow-up of 5.1 years (range 1.4 to 9.4). Severe contractures made up 50% of cases, followed by 23% moderate, and 27% mild. Average extension/flexion for the post-traumatic group (n= 30) increased by 63° ± 31 and by 29° ± 24 for the degenerative group (n= 22). Average gain in pronosupination was 38° ± 62 in the post-traumatic group and 13°±23 in the degenerative group. Postoperative DASH scores were 17.5 ± 18.4 for post-traumatic cases and 12.8 ± 19.3 for degenerative cases. Arthroscopic elbow contracture release is an effective intervention for degenerative and post-traumatic elbow contracture for both flexion/extension and pronosupination contracture. Furthermore, a two-stage release should be considered when both flexion and pronosupinaton contractures are present. IV, case series, treatment study.

Reliable Pain Relief But Variable Return to Play After Arthroscopic Elbow Debridement in Baseball Players

PurposeWe sought to determine the rate of return to play (RTP) in baseball players following arthroscopic elbow debridement for the management of the symptomatic elbow.MethodsA retrospective case series with prospectively collected data via questionnaire was conducted on all baseball players who underwent an arthroscopic elbow debridement, from July, 15, 2004 to November 1, 2017. A postoperative questionnaire was released at an average 7.25 year follow-up. Data collected included age, gender, laterality, preoperative diagnosis, range of motion, duration and characterization of symptoms, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, complications, level of play, and RTP.ResultsFollow-up data were available on 18 baseball players. Average age was 19.7 years (range 16-24). Seventeen were pitchers, and 1 was a catcher. Level of play included 12 collegiate athletes, 2 high school athletes, 2 recreational athletes, 1 minor league athletes, and 1 major league athlete. Rate of RTP was 61% (11/18) with 6 returning to a greater level and 5 to an equal level. The length of time to RTP following surgery was most commonly within 6-8 months (44.4%, 8/18). Mean VAS pain score improved from 6.9 to 0.75 (P = <.001). 27.8% (5/18) had repeat surgery secondary to recurrent/persistent stiffness or heterotopic ossification. 77.8% (14/18) of patients rated their final outcome as either “very satisfied” (9/18), or “satisfied” (5/18).ConclusionsPain can reliably be relieved following arthroscopic elbow debridement in baseball players. Although patient satisfaction may be high, patients do not always return to their previous level of play. Patients must be counseled on the risk of limited postoperative athletic capacity before the time of surgery.Level of EvidenceLevel IV, therapeutic case series.

Return to Play Rates Following Arthroscopic Treatment of Elbow Osteochondritis Dissecans Lesions in Adolescent Baseball Players

Objectives:Osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) of the humeral capitellum is a common elbow injury in adolescent overhead throwing athletes likely secondary to the excessive valgus stress placed on the joint during the throwing motion. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively investigate the clinical findings and outcomes, including return to play rates, of overhead throwing athletes who underwent elbow arthroscopy for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of elbow.Methods:Throwing athletes who underwent elbow arthroscopy over an eight-year period, 2010 to 2018, were identified and included in our analysis. From this cohort of patients, those who were treated for OCD of the elbow joint and were baseball players were selected for analysis. Non-baseball athletes and those who underwent a concurrent procedure that required an open approach were excluded. Patients were contacted via phone to complete the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic Shoulder and Elbow Score (KJOC), the Mayo Elbow Score as well as a custom return to play and re-injury questionnaire. The minimum follow-up was 2 years from arthroscopic treatment.Results:Twenty patients met the inclusion criteria and were assessed in this analysis. All of the patients were male with an average BMI of 24.7 (range, 17.8-36.6). The average age at the time of surgery was 15.8 years old (range, 11.7-19.9). All 20 athletes played baseball pre-operatively and had no injury history or previous elbow surgery. Two patients had complications post-operatively. One patient received surgery for contracture release and debridement 7 months post-operatively. The other patient had a repeat arthroscopic microfracture procedure 4 months post-operatively followed by placement of an osteochondral allograft 11 months post-operatively for continued symptoms. Furthermore, three patients sustained an injury to the throwing shoulder or elbow after the operation. Two patients reported that the post-operative injury was throwing-related. One sustained an elbow stress fracture which was treated non-operatively while the other had a UCL reconstruction at 48 months post-operatively. The last patient reported sustaining an acromioclavicular joint separation that was treated operatively but not related to baseball or throwing.A total of 16 patients were available to complete the assessment. The average final follow-up was 5.5 (2.1-10.2) years with average KJOC of 64.6 (range, 13.9-97.0) and a Mayo Elbow Score of 90.0 (range, 60-100). Following surgery, 13/16 (81.2%) patients were able to return to their pre-injury sport and all returned to the same or higher level of competition. Seven patients reported improved symptoms, eight reported resolution of symptoms and one reported worsening of their symptoms after surgery. Overall patients were quite satisfied with their surgery, reporting an average 85.6% satisfaction rating.Conclusions:The results of this study indicate that elbow arthroscopy for osteochondral lesions in overhead throwing athletes is a reliable operation with 81.2% of athletes returning at the same or higher level of competition with low re-operation rates. In addition, these results boast a low complication rate and high patient satisfaction rate following elbow arthroscopy for OCD.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Osteochondritis Dissecans Lesions of the Elbow Treated with Arthroscopy

Objectives:While numerous studies exist evaluating the short-term clinical outcomes for patients who underwent arthroscopy for osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) of the capitellum, literature on long-term clinical outcomes for a relatively high number of this subset of patients from a single institution is limited. We performed a retrospective analysis on all patients treated surgically for OCD of the capitellum at our institution from January 2001 to August 2018. Our hypothesis was that clinical outcomes for patients treated arthroscopically for OCD of the capitellum would be favorable, with improved subjective pain scores and acceptable return to play for these patients.Methods:Inclusion criteria for this study included the diagnosis and surgical treatment of OCD of the capitellum treated arthroscopically with greater than 2-year follow-up. Exclusion criteria included any surgical treatment on the ipsilateral elbow prior to the first elbow arthroscopy for OCD at our institution, a missing operative report, and/or any portions of the arthroscopic procedure that were done open. Follow-up was achieved over the phone by a single author using three questionnaires: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons – Elbow (ASES-E), Andrews/Carson KJOC, and our institution-specific return-to-play questionnaire.Results:After the inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to our surgical database, our institution identified 101 patients eligible for this study. Of these patients, 3 were then excluded for incomplete operative reports, leaving 98 patients. Of those 98 patients, 81 were successfully contacted over the phone for an 82.7% follow-up rate. The average age for this group at arthroscopy was 15.2 years old and average post-operative time at follow-up was 8.2 years.Of the 81 patients, 74 had abrasion chondroplasty of the capitellar OCD lesion (91.4%) while the other 7 had minor debridement (8.6%). Of the 74 abrasion chondroplasties, 29 of those had microfracture, (39.2% of that subgroup and 35.8% of the entire inclusion group). Of the microfracture group, 4 also had an intraarticular, iliac crest, mesenchymal stem-cell injection into the elbow (13.7% of capitellar microfractures, 5.4% of abrasion chondroplasties, and 4.9% of the inclusion group overall). Additional arthroscopic procedures included osteophyte debridement, minor synovectomies, capsular releases, manipulation under anesthesia, and plica excisions.Nine patients had subsequent revision arthroscopy (11.1% failure rate, 5 of which were at our institution and 4 of which were elsewhere). There were also 3 patients within the inclusion group that had ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction/repair (3.7%, 1 of which was done at our institution and the other 2 elsewhere). Lastly, 3 patients had shoulder operations on the ipsilateral extremity (3.7%, 1 operation done at our institution and the other 2 elsewhere).To control for confounding variables, scores for the questionnaires were assessed only for patients with no other surgeries on the operative arm following arthroscopy (66 patients). This group had an adjusted average follow-up of 7.9 years. For the ASES-E questionnaire, the difference between the average of the ASES-E function scores for the right and the left was 0.87 out of a maximum of 36. ASES-E pain was an average of 2.37 out of a max pain scale of 50 and surgical satisfaction was an average of 9.5 out of 10. The average Andrews/Carson score out of a 100 was 91.5 and the average KJOC score was 90.5 out of 100. Additionally, out of the 64 patients evaluated who played sports at the time of their arthroscopy, 3 ceased athletic participation due to limitations of the elbow.Conclusions:In conclusion, this study demonstrated an excellent return-to-play rate and comparable subjective long-term questionnaire scores with a 11.1% failure rate following arthroscopy for OCD of the capitellum. Further statistical analysis is needed for additional comparisons, including return-to-play between different sports, outcome comparisons between different surgical techniques performed during the arthroscopies, and to what degree the size of the lesion, number of loose bodies removed or other associated comorbidities can influence long-term clinical outcomes.

Advanced elbow arthroscopy: Tips and tricks

Elbow arthroscopy can be a challenge, however, indications and benefits compared to open elbow surgery are rapidly evolving. The elbow has seemed to lag behind other joints including the knee, shoulder, ankle and the hip, both in number of cases and in widespread acceptance, as a joint amenable to arthroscopic management. This has occurred despite literature demonstrating successful utilization of arthroscopy in the management of a variety of injuries. The purpose of this review is to clarify and expand the indications for arthroscopy of the elbow in 2021. We will also offer tips and tricks to help make elbow arthroscopy more successful. Since originally publishing these guidelines in 2007, elbow arthroscopy has evolved, although the principles and progressions remain the same.

Elbow arthroscopy - Indications and technique

Throughout the years, elbow arthroscopy has advanced tremendously due to improvements in technology and surgical techniques. It is now considered a safe and effective treatment for a variety of elbow disorders. Due to the small working space and nearby neurovascular structures, it is a technically challenging procedure. It can be used to successfully treat complaints caused by loose bodies, osteoarthritis, arthrofibrosis, OCD, lateral epicondylitis, VEOS and fractures. The most devastating complication of elbow arthroscopy is (permanent) nerve injury. Therefore, distortion of the anatomy of the elbow joint and transposition of the ulnar nerve can be a contra-indication for elbow arthroscopy due to the higher risk of postoperative complications. The results of the arthroscopy depend on the experience, knowledge, technique and expertise of the performing surgeon.

The post-traumatic stiff elbow: A review

Upper extremity function is highly dependent on elbow motion in order to adequately position the hand in space. Loss of this motion due to stiffness following trauma can cause patients substantial disability, leading to difficulties with performing activities of daily living. Post-traumatic elbow stiffness is challenging to treat, and therefore prevention is of paramount importance. Key measures that can be used to prevent elbow stiffness are early surgical intervention for fracture or joint instability, as well as active mobilisation, which helps to prevent oedema and an increase in viscosity of inflammatory exudates. Other options include splinting and continuous passive mobilisation.Once non-operative methods of addressing post-traumatic stiffness have been exhausted, arthrolysis of the stiff elbow can be performed via open or arthroscopic means depending on the type of pathology involved (intrinsic or extrinsic contracture) and experience of the surgeon with elbow arthroscopy. The particular open approach used depends on several factors, which include the formation and location of any heterotopic ossification present. Improvements in range of motion can be expected with both open and arthroscopic techniques, which can be effective and rewarding for patients. Post-operative rehabilitation, particularly early active mobilisation, should be considered essential in order to optimise patient outcomes following surgery.This review aims to explore elbow stiffness following traumatic aetiology, assessing its pathogenesis and prevention, as well as reviewing surgical treatment options and post-operative rehabilitation.

Arthroscopic Elbow Debridement Using Anterocentral Transbrachialis Portal

Arthroscopic debridement for elbow osteoarthritis has been widely used as a minimally invasive treatment; however, in some cases, it can be a technically demanding procedure, such as in patients with severe osteoarthritis with large spur formation and severe synovitis. The anterocentral transbrachialis portal is a recently developed portal for elbow arthroscopy, which allows easy and convenient access to the anterior compartment for sufficient debridement. This report describes in detail the anterocentral transbrachialis portal and its usefulness for debridement of the elbow joint in osteoarthritis.

Clinical and functional outcome of arthroscopic management of intra articular elbow disorders

The elbow is a highly constrained synovial hinge joint that frequently becomes stiff after injury. Elbow stiffness is defined as flexion 30°. Trauma is a common cause of stiffness in the elbow joint with rates ranging from 3% to 20. Elbow motion is required so that the hand can be properly positioned for activities of daily living. For this reason, joint contractures at the elbow can be poorly tolerated. Elbow arthroscopy is a valuable tool for both diagnostic and therapeutic purpose. Minimal invasiveness and effective rehabilitation after the surgery helps the patient achieve an early recovery and facilitates return to normal activities of daily living. This study was conducted to determine the clinical and functional outcome of arthroscopic management of Intra articular elbow disorders among 30 patients by Arthroscopic fibrolysis. From our study we can conclude that, elbow arthroscopy is an excellent surgical treatment for intra articular elbow disorder in selected patients resistant to conservative management.