Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLópez Alameda, Socorro
dc.contributor.authorVarillas Delgado, David 
dc.contributor.authorGallego, Juan de Felipe
dc.contributor.authorGonzález Granados, Maria Gabriela
dc.contributor.authorHernández Castillejo, Luis Enrique
dc.contributor.authorGarcía de Lucas, Fernando
dc.date.accessioned2022-08-05T07:34:32Z
dc.date.available2022-08-05T07:34:32Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifier.issn1058-2746spa
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10641/3085
dc.description.abstractBackground Lateral epicondylitis is common in workers who perform repetitive movements of the entire upper limb. Approximately 85%-90% of patients respond satisfactorily to conservative treatment, but in resistant patients, surgical treatment is considered. Classic open surgery is successful in between 70% and 97% of patients, similarly to more modern techniques such as arthroscopy. We sought to demonstrate the superiority of the Wolff technique in terms of clinical results. The goals of this study were to compare the functional and pain outcomes of arthroscopic surgery with open surgery using fasciotomy via the Wolff technique in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Methods This was a retrospective study of 47 working-age patients with resistant lateral epicondylitis: 27 underwent arthroscopic surgery and 20 underwent open surgery. Visual analog scale scores for pain and function, as well as the QuickDASH (short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire) score, Mayo Elbow Performance Score, and Broberg and Morrey Rating System score, were collected preoperatively and postoperatively; return to patients’ previous work and surgical time were also recorded. Results No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups in the reduction in the visual analog scale score (5.26 in arthroscopy group vs. 5.75 in fasciotomy group, P = .5), QuickDASH (short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire) score (19 vs. 19.4, P = .9), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (82 vs. 81.5, P = .8), or Broberg and Morrey Rating System score (81.9 vs. 82.6, P = .9). The differences in terms of time off were also not statistically significant. The period of work leave corresponded, on average, to 83.78 days in the arthroscopy group and 89.95 days in the Wolff group. The mean surgical time was 44.2 minutes in the group undergoing arthroscopic intervention and 27.5 minutes in the fasciotomy group, showing a statistically significant difference (P < .001). Conclusions Arthroscopic surgery and open surgery provide similar functional results and pain reduction in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis.spa
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherJournal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgeryspa
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/*
dc.subjectLateral epicondylitisspa
dc.subjectArthroscopyspa
dc.subjectFasciotomyspa
dc.subjectLabor painspa
dc.subjectRadial nerve releasespa
dc.titleArthroscopic surgery versus open surgery for lateral epicondylitis in an active work population: a comparative study.spa
dc.typearticlespa
dc.description.versionpre-printspa
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessspa
dc.description.extent127 KBspa
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jse.2021.11.017spa
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S105827462100865Xspa


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView
4.- Arthroscopic surgery versus ...126.1KbPDFView/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España