Open and arthroscopic debridement for lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on comparative studies

外侧上髁炎的开放式和关节镜下清创术:基于比较研究的系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To systematically compare and meta-analyse the clinical efficacy of open and arthroscopic debridement for patients with lateral epicondylitis. METHODS: A retrieval and systematic review of comparative studies of lateral epicondylitis treated with open versus arthroscopic debridement was conducted, and further pooled analysis was performed to compare the overall differences in clinical outcomes, including pain and elbow function scores, surgical time, complications and revision surgery rate. RESULTS: A total of 10 comparative studies involving 20,060 patients with lateral epicondylitis who were followed up for 12-93.6 months were included. Preliminary meta-analysis revealed that the visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain was greater in the arthroscopic group than in the open group (MD: 0.01 [- 0.27-0.29], p = 0.93; I(2) = 0%, p = 0.98). Additionally, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and quickDASH scores were worse in the arthroscopic group than in the open group (MD: 0.59[- 1.01-2.20], p = 0.47; I(2) = 68%, p = 0.02), and the surgical time was significantly longer in the arthroscopic group than in the open group (MD: 13.36[12.42-14.29], p < 0.00001; I(2) = 98%, p < 0.00001). There were not significant differences of complication rate, revision surgery rate between the arthroscopic group and the open group (RR: 0.82 [0.54-1.25], p = 0.36; I(2) = 0%, p = 0.80; RR: 1.30 [0.90-1.88], p = 0.16; I(2) = 0%, p = 0.76). Radial nerve injury represented the most prevalent complication within the arthroscopy group, and its incidence was slightly higher in the arthroscopic group compared to the open group [0.46% (12/2562) VS 0.33% (58/17409), X(2) = 1.169, p = 0.281]. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we did not observe any significant advantage of arthroscopic debridement over open debridement in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis, but the surgical duration was significantly longer in the arthroscopic group, and we could assume that arthroscopic debridement may be more expensive. It was important to highlight that radial nerve injury represented the most prevalent complication within the arthroscopy group, which suggested that arthroscopic procedures for lateral epicondylitis should be performed in experienced hands. Therefore, the decision between arthroscopic and open debridement should take into account various factors, including the advantages of minimally invasive techniques, cost-benefit analysis, potential complications, and the surgeon's level of expertise.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。