The temperature profile in elbow arthroscopy using radiofrequency ablation.

INTRODUCTION: Over the last decades, arthroscopic surgery has become increasingly relevant as its minimally invasive approach offers many benefits. To investigate the risks of orthoscopic surgery at the elbow, this study aimed to investigate the development of temperatures in elbow joints while performing radiofrequency ablation in arthroscopic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed standard arthroscopic surgeries with posterolateral, transtricipital and anterolateral approaches on seven cadaveric elbows and performed ablation on predefined locations with or without irrigation. Two temperature probes were positioned into the olecranon fossa and between the ulnar nerve and the medial joint capsule. The temperature data were recorded using a real-time data logger. A bipolar radiofrequency ablation (bRFA) device was used at the medial and lateral recess and in the fossa olecrani over a defined period. Data was then analyzed using Matlab. RESULTS: Using bRFA without irrigation results in rapidly increasing temperature within the joint. A significant temperature increase was found within only 5 s without irrigation (p = 0.0052) in the fossa olecrani. We did not observe critical temperatures above 41 °C close to the ulnar nerve within 30 s under constant irrigation (p = 0.0747). CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) can be safely used in elbow arthroscopy with irrigation. The continuous use without irrigation should be limited to 3 s. Despite the anatomical proximity of the ulnar nerve and capsule, we were able to show that a possible rise in temperature most likely does not affect the ulnar nerve.

Arthroscopic release and decortication provide earlier return to work with similar patient satisfaction compared to continued intensive conservative therapy for recalcitrant tennis elbow: a retrospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Tennis elbow management has primarily been conservative over the years with over 90% of the cases being managed conservatively. Surgical intervention may be necessary only for symptomatic recalcitrant cases of tennis elbow cases. However, there are gaps in the literature when it comes to comparison of the return to pre-operative return to their work and level of activities among patients who undergo arthroscopic management and those who receive conservative management. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted to compare 23 patients receiving continued intensive conservative (CIC) management in group 1 with 24 patients undergoing arthroscopic release of the extensor carpi radialis brevis and lateral epicondyle decortication (ARD) in group 2. The study had a minimum follow-up period of 3.5 years. The researchers compared the groups in terms of return to work (RTW) at the same intensity or lower level and any changes in their previous work. Objective grip strength and patient-reported outcome measures, such as post-intervention satisfaction level (rated on a scale of 0-100) and visual analog scale (VAS) for residual elbow pain, were also compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Return to work (RTW) occurred significantly earlier in group 2 (mean 6.13 months) compared to group 1 (mean 4.64 months), and a greater number of patients in group 2 (13/24, 54.2%) were able to return to the same of work. Although not statistically significant, the ARD group exhibited comparable patient satisfaction (p = 0.62) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores for residual elbow pain (p = 0.67). Grip strength was comparable (p = 0.084, 0.121) between the affected and unaffected sides of the bilateral upper extremities and among both groups of patients. CONCLUSION: The use of ARD for RTE (recalcitrant tennis elbow) indicates a significantly earlier return to work (RTW) at the same or lower intensity level compared to the standard CIC therapy protocol. Objective grip strength was comparable to the non-affected side and among the two groups of patients receiving two different management modalities. Comparable patient-reported satisfaction and residual lateral elbow pain were also noted among both the groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective, comparative study, level III.

Five-Year Follow-up of Adolescent Gymnasts After Surgical Treatment of Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Elbow.

PURPOSE: Elbow osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) is well-studied in throwing athletes; however, there are limited data regarding gymnasts with capitellar OCD lesions. We aimed to determine the overall rate of return to competition following surgical treatment of capitellar OCD lesions and to determine the relationship, if any, between arthroscopic grade of lesion and ability to return to competition. METHODS: A medical chart Current Procedural Terminology query from 2000 to 2016 yielded data on 55 competitive adolescent gymnasts who were treated surgically for elbow OCD lesions in a total of 69 elbows. Retrospective chart review was used to collect data on preoperative and postoperative symptoms and surgical treatment. Patients were contacted to complete questionnaires (Modified Andrews Elbow Scoring System, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) on return to sport. Current elbow function and follow-up data were available for 40 of 69 elbows. RESULTS: Average age at time of surgery was 12.1 years with 18 of 55 (33%) of patients competing at a pre-elite level of gymnastics (level 9 or 10 of 10) before surgery. Nine out of 31 gymansts (29%) underwent bilateral surgery for OCD lesions. Average OCD lesion size was 10 mm. Thirty-one of 40 elbows (78%) were treated with debridement back to a stable cartilage rim with microfracture, and nine of 40 elbows (22%) were treated with debridement alone. Thirty-six of 40 patients (90% returned to competitive gymnastics with all returning patients competing at or above the same level after surgery. Among the patients who were followed up, 29 of 30 patients (97%) reported some difficulty with specific events on return to competition. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of return to sport for gymnasts at 90% is similar to that observed in other sports. This study suggests that elbow OCD lesions are not career-ending injuries for adolescent gymnasts; however, gymnasts should not expect a fully asymptomatic return to all events in a sport. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Radiologically severe osteoarthritis is related to worse clinical outcomes after arthroscopic osteocapsular arthroplasty in primary elbow osteoarthritis at medium-term follow-up: a retrospective cohort study.

HYPOTHESIS: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic osteocapsular arthroplasty (OCA) at medium-term follow-up according to the radiologic severity of primary elbow osteoarthritis (OA) and assess serial changes in clinical outcomes in each group. METHODS: Patients treated from January 2010 to April 2019 with arthroscopic OCA for primary elbow OA with a minimum of 3 years' follow-up were retrospectively assessed regarding range of motion (ROM), visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) preoperatively, at short-term follow-up (3-12 months postoperatively), and at medium-term follow-up (≥3 years after surgery). Preoperative computed tomography was performed to evaluate the radiologic severity of OA using the Kwak classification. Clinical outcomes were compared according to the radiologic severity of OA by their absolute values and the number of patients achieving the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS). Serial changes in the clinical outcomes in each subgroup were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 43 patients, 14, 18, and 11 were classified as the stage I, II, and III groups, respectively; the mean follow-up duration was 71.3 ± 28.9 months, and the mean age was 56.5 ± 7.2 years. At medium-term follow-up, the stage I group had a better ROM arc (stage I, 114° ± 14°; stage II, 100° ± 23°; and stage III, 97° ± 20°; P = .067) and VAS pain score (stage I, 0.9 ± 1.3; stage II, 1.8 ± 2.1; and stage III, 2.4 ± 2.1; P = .168) than the stage II and III groups without reaching statistical significance, whereas the stage I group had a significantly better MEPS (stage I, 93.2 ± 7.5; stage II, 84.7 ± 11.9; and stage III, 78.6 ± 15.2; P = .017) than the stage III group. The percentages of patients achieving the PASS for the ROM arc (P = .684) and VAS pain score (P = .398) were comparable between the 3 groups; however, the percentage achieving the PASS for the MEPS was significantly higher in the stage I group than in the stage III group (100.0% vs. 54.5%, P = .016). During serial assessment, all clinical outcomes tended to improve at the short-term follow-up. Compared with the short-term period, the ROM arc tended to decrease at the medium-term follow-up whereas the VAS pain score and MEPS overall did not show significant changes. CONCLUSION: After arthroscopic OCA, the stage I group showed an overall better ROM arc and pain score than the stage II and III groups at medium-term follow-up, whereas the stage I group showed a significantly better MEPS and higher percentage of patients achieving the PASS for the MEPS than the stage III group.

Risk of nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy: ultrasonographic evaluation of preoperative patients.

BACKGROUND: To clarify the real risk of nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy, the distances of the radial and median nerves to the elbow joint were investigated using ultrasonography in patients who underwent surgery. METHODS: A total of 35 patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery of the elbow were investigated. The distances of the nerves to the capsule and bony landmarks were measured using ultrasonography. The radial nerve distances were measured at the capitellum, joint space, radial head, and radial neck levels. The median nerve distances were measured at the trochlear, joint space, and coronoid process levels. The patients were divided into 2 groups: nine patients in the hydrarthrosis (HA) group and 26 patients in the non-hydrarthrosis (non-HA) group. HA was defined as the intra-articular effusion on magnetic resonance imaging scans. RESULTS: The radial nerve ran closer to the capsule at the radial neck level in the HA group than in the non-HA group (2.0 mm vs. 5.9 mm, P < .01). In the non-HA group, the radial nerve ran closer to the radial head than in the HA group (6.3 mm vs. 8.5 mm, P = .01). The median nerve ran closer to the capsule at the trochlear level in the HA group than in the non-HA group (5.2 mm vs. 8.8 mm, P < .01). Nerves at a distance of ≤2 mm from the capsule were found in 7 patients at the radial neck of the radial nerve and in 2 patients at the trochlear region of the median nerve in the HA group. In the non-HA group, they were found in 3 patients at the radial head and in 1 patient at the joint space of the radial nerve. CONCLUSIONS: The dangerous locations for nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy vary according to hydrarthrosis, and this risk should be recognized during arthroscopic surgery.

Screw placement in arthroscopically assisted osteosynthesis of radial head fractures using a reference k-wire in the radiocapitellar joint: a cadaveric study.

PURPOSE: The optimal screw placement in arthroscopically assisted fixation of radial head fractures is still an issue and no guiding methods have been evaluated in the recent literature. The study hypothesis was that using a "reference k-wire" percutaneously inserted in and parallel to the radiocapitellar joint would enable to achieve a trajectory more parallel to the radial head articular surface as compared to a free-hand k-wire placement. METHODS: Arthroscopically assisted placement of a k-wire in the radial head was performed in seven fresh-frozen human cadaver specimens by three surgeons. Three different techniques were evaluated: freehand drilling (technique A), placement using a "reference" k-wire in the radiocapitellar joint as a reference without (technique B), and with the AO parallel k-wire guide (technique C). Radiographs from all procedures were obtained and the inclination angle "α" between the k-wire and the articular surface of the radial head was measured and compared among the techniques. RESULTS: Angles of 84 radiographs were obtained and showed a mean α angle of 30.1° ± 13° for technique A, 5.7° ± 4.5° for technique B, and 5.4° ± 3.7° for technique C. The angle α was significantly higher with technique A as compared to B (p < 0.0001) and C (p < 0.0001). There was no difference between methods B and C (n.s.). No difference was observed among the surgeons for all three methods (p = 0.66). CONCLUSION: With the use of an additional "reference" k-wire placed in the radiocapitellar joint, the guiding k-wire for screw drilling can be placed almost parallel to the radial head joint line with limited variability and a good reproducibility during arthroscopically assisted radial head fracture fixation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The here-presented method of an additional, percutaneous introduced "reference" k-wire is easily applicable and helpful to achieve parallel screw placement during arthroscopically assisted radial head fracture fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, biomechanical cadaver study.

Application of ultrasound in avoiding radial nerve injury during elbow arthroscopy: a retrospective follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: A safe and effective technique for anterolateral portal placement in elbow arthroscopy is significant. We compared the outcomes of patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy using different ultrasound-assisted techniques. METHODS: From May 2016 to June 2021 a retrospective analysis on all patients who underwent elbow arthroscopy in our department was performed. Patients were separated into three groups: non-ultrasound; preoperative ultrasound; and intraoperative ultrasound. The minimum follow-up period was 1 year. Nerve injuries, visual analog scale (VAS), Mayo elbow-performance score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH), and range of motion (ROM) of the elbow were evaluated for comparison among the three groups pre- and post-operatively. RESULTS: All 55 patients completed a 1-year follow-up: non-ultrasound (n = 20); preoperative ultrasound (n = 17); and intraoperative ultrasound (n = 18). There were 3 cases (15.0%) of transient radial nerve palsy in the non-ultrasound group. No nerve complications occurred in preoperative ultrasound and intraoperative ultrasound groups. The probability of postoperative radial nerve injury in the three groups was statistically different (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the VAS score, MEPS, DASH score, and ROM among the three groups at the follow-up evaluation (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Performing anterolateral portal placement during elbow arthroscopy with ultrasound-assisted techniques successfully avoided radial nerve injury.

Anatomic study of an anterior portal for percutaneous internal fixation of capitellum fractures.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the capitellum are uncommon and difficult to treat surgically. Capitellar open reduction-internal fixation uses a lateral open approach with posterior-to-anterior or anterior-to-posterior screw fixation. We investigated the use of an anterior portal for placement of anterior-to-posterior screw fixation through cadaveric measurement of the anatomic relationships from an anteriorly to posteriorly placed Kirschner wire (K-wire) to anterior elbow structures and calculated the percentage of articular surface accessed from the anterior portal. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric elbows without radiographic or cutaneous evidence of prior trauma or surgery were used for this study. An arthroscopic proximal anteromedial portal was cannulized, and the radiocapitellar joint was evaluated. A single 1-cm portal was placed 1 cm distal to the elbow flexion crease and based lateral to the biceps tendon. The location of the portal was confirmed with a spinal needle, and blunt dissection with a hemostat was performed down to capsular tissue and for arthrotomy. A spinal needle sheath was threaded over a blunt switching stick and served as a cannula for placement of a 0.062 K-wire. Articular mapping was performed with cartilage scraping by the K-wire; the K-wire was then placed at the perceived center along the proximal-to-distal and radial-to-ulnar axis of the capitellum. Fluoroscopic confirmation of the wire's location was performed. Under loupe magnification, anatomic dissection was performed and the shortest distance measurements were recorded with digital calipers from the K-wire to the dissected structures. Capitellar articular measurements were recorded, in addition to the articular area defined by the K-wire. Data analysis was performed, and the average distance and standard deviation (in millimeters) were calculated. For structures that were pierced by or touching the K-wire, the distance was recorded as 0.1 mm. RESULTS: The average distance from the K-wire to the radial, lateral antebrachial cutaneous, and median nerves was 1.8 mm, 11.5 mm, and 28.0 mm, respectively. The average distance from the median cubital vein and biceps tendon was 3.7 mm and 13.4 mm, respectively. The pin track pierced the brachioradialis and supinator muscles in all but 1 specimen. The average capitellar articular surface marked was 39.1% of the calculated articular footprint of the capitellum. CONCLUSIONS: The anterior portal to the capitellum is directly adjacent to the radial nerve and lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve, where each is susceptible to injury. We recommend blunt dissection and insertion of a cannula to allow drilling and placement of internal fixation in a relatively safe manner with respect to neurovascular structures.

Routine diagnostic arthroscopy with elbow ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction does not reduce the need for future valgus extension overload-related surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Valgus extension overload syndrome (VEOS) most commonly affects overhead athletes and consists of a constellation of conditions involving the medial, posterior, and lateral elbow, with the most widely discussed being ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries. Many athletes with UCL tears also have findings consistent with other VEOS conditions, though these are not consistently symptomatic. Given the high rate of concomitant pathology, many authors have recommended performing arthroscopy at the time of UCL reconstruction (UCLR) to diagnose and address concomitant VEOS pathology; however, it is not known if this practice actually leads to a reduction in subsequent surgeries for VEOS conditions following index UCLR. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine if performing routine diagnostic arthroscopy (RDA) in patients undergoing UCLR was associated with a lower incidence of future VEOS-related surgery. METHODS: This study was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, with the primary outcome of interest being the likelihood of needing future surgery to address VEOS conditions with or without RDA at the time of index UCLR. The proportion and incidence rate of subsequent VEOS-related surgeries following UCLR with and without RDA were compared in mixed effects models. RESULTS: There were 25 eligible studies from an initial 1335 systematically identified articles, with results for 2118 UCLR cases. Among these, there were a total of 94 reported VEOS-related surgeries. The proportion of subsequent VEOS-related surgeries was lower when UCLR was performed with RDA (0.40%, 95% CI 0.00%-3.51%) than without (1.16%, 95% CI 0.03%-3.25%), but the difference was not significant (P = .584). The incidence rate of VEOS-related surgeries was 0.16 (95% CI 0.00-0.95) per 100 person-years with RDA and 0.14 (95% CI 0.00-0.55) per 100 person-years without RDA (P = .942). CONCLUSION: RDA preceding UCLR does not significantly reduce the proportion or rate of subsequent surgery for other VEOS conditions. There has been a decrease in RDA utilization with UCLR over time for athletes with torn/incompetent UCLs but otherwise no known symptomatic VEOS conditions, and this trend appears to be justified based on these findings.

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

PURPOSE: To determine the complications from elbow arthroscopy for the past 16 years, and to summarize the most reported safety techniques and risk factors. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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 65 years. The average body mass indexes were between 26 and over 40 kg/m2. There was a prevalence of male sex (from 50.2 to 79.2%). Most of the studies reported a minimum follow-up (range, 4 weeks-12 months). 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%. CONCLUSIONS: 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 65 years, 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%.

Surgical management of osteoarthritis in the shoulder and elbow.

Interesting recent trends are apparent in the setting of shoulder and elbow pathology. There is an increase in utilization of shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis and post traumatic arthritis. At the same time, there remain limited options for osteoarthritis of the elbow particularly in the young and or active patient. This manuscript details surgical options for osteoarthritis at the elbow and shoulder.

Arthroscopic lateral capsule resection is enough for the management of lateral epicondylitis.

PURPOSE: Controversy exists with regards to the etiology and treatment of lateral epicondylitis and the role of the lateral capsule in this pathology. The aim of this study was to compare arthroscopic lateral capsule resection with or without extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) tendon debridement for treatment of lateral epicondylitis. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 38 patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery for LE with two different techniques: Eighteen patients were treated with arthroscopic lateral capsular resection (LCR) + ECRB debridement and 20 patients were treated with arthroscopic LCR alone, without ECRB debridement. Both groups were assessed with Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QDASH) score for function and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for pain. RESULTS: Quick DASH scores were 12 [Formula: see text] 5 and 13 [Formula: see text] 4 at Groups 1 and 2, respectively, without any statistically significant difference. VAS pain scores were 15 [Formula: see text] 2 for both groups. VAS function scores were 85 [Formula: see text] 22 and 86 [Formula: see text] 18 at Groups 1 and 2 respectively. Sick leave periods in terms of weeks were 7 [Formula: see text] 5 and 7 [Formula: see text] 4 at Groups 1 and 2, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in outcome of the two groups compared in terms of VAS pain, function scores, failure (re-operation) rates and sick leave period at the end of final follow-up. CONCLUSION: Both arthroscopic LCR alone and Arthroscopic LCR with ECRB debridement for the management of refractory LE provide significant improvement in pain and function. Isolated Arthroscopic LCR could be a sufficient surgical treatment for refractory LE. Thus, ECRB debridement or release may not be necessary in every case. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Effectiveness of radiographs and computed tomography in evaluating primary elbow osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative radiographic assessment of osteophyte and loose body locations is critical in planning an arthroscopic débridement for primary elbow osteoarthritis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of radiographs and computed tomography (CT) in localizing osteophytes and loose bodies. METHODS: A consecutive series of 36 patients with primary elbow osteoarthritis was investigated with radiographs and multiaxial 2-dimensional CT prior to elbow arthroscopy. The location of osteophytes and loose bodies was assessed in 9 anatomic locations by 2 fellowship-trained upper extremity surgeons. The diagnostic effectiveness of both imaging modalities was evaluated by calculating the sensitivity and specificity and compared to the gold standard of elbow arthroscopy. Inter- and intrarater percentage agreement between the observations was calculated using Kappa score. RESULTS: The mean sensitivity for detecting osteophytes in the 9 different anatomic locations was 46% with radiographs and 98% with CT, whereas the mean specificity was 66% and 21% for radiographs and CT, respectively. The mean sensitivity and specificity for loose body detection with radiography were 49% and 89%, respectively, whereas CT had a mean sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 47%. The overall inter-rater percentage agreement between the surgeons in detecting osteophytes and loose bodies on radiographs was 80% and 85%, respectively, whereas on CT it was 95% for detecting osteophytes and 91% for loose bodies. CONCLUSION: CT has greater sensitivity than radiographs for the detection of osteophytes and loose bodies in primary elbow osteoarthritis. The lower specificity of CT may be due to this imaging modality's ability to detect small osteophytes and loose bodies that may not be readily identified during elbow arthroscopy. Radiographs have an inferior inter-rater percentage agreement compared with CT. CT is a valuable preoperative investigation to assist surgeons in identifying the location of osteophytes and loose bodies in patients undergoing surgery for primary elbow osteoarthritis.

Utility of a 3-dimensionally printed color-coded bone model to visualize impinging osteophytes for arthroscopic débridement arthroplasty in elbow osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The identification and precise removal of bony impingement lesions during arthroscopic débridement arthroplasty for elbow osteoarthritis require a high level of experience and surgical skill. We have developed a new technique to identify impinging osteophytes on a computer display by simulating elbow motion using the multiple positions of 3-dimensional (3D) elbow models created from computed tomography data. Moreover, an actual color-coded 3D model indicating the impinging osteophytes was created with a 3D printer and was used as an intraoperative reference tool. This study aimed to verify the efficacy of these new technologies in arthroscopic débridement for elbow osteoarthritis. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 16 patients treated with arthroscopic débridement for elbow osteoarthritis after a preoperative computer simulation. Patients who underwent surgery with only the preoperative simulation were assigned to group 1 (n = 8), whereas those on whom we operated using a color-coded 3D bone model created from the preoperative simulation were assigned to group 2 (n = 8). Elbow extension and flexion range of motion (ROM), the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and the severity of osteoarthritis were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Although preoperative elbow flexion and MEPS values were not significantly different between the groups, preoperative extension was significantly more restricted in group 2 than in group 1 (P = .0131). Group 2 tended to include more severe cases according to the Hastings-Rettig classification (P = .0693). ROM and MEPS values were improved in all cases. No significant differences in postoperative ROM or MEPS values were observed between the groups. There were no significant differences in the improvement in ROM or MEPS values between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of preoperative simulation and a color-coded bone model could help to achieve as good postoperative ROM and MEPS values for advanced elbow osteoarthritis as those for early and intermediate stages.

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

BACKGROUND: Elbow 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 METHODS: In 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. RESULTS: In 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. CONCLUSIONS: Elbow 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 EVIDENCE: Level IV-case series.

Establishing the learning curve for elbow arthroscopy: surgeon and trainee perspectives on number of cases needed and optimal methods for acquiring skill.

BACKGROUND: Elbow arthroscopy has increased in frequency as its indications have widened. Despite this growth, a learning curve has not yet been defined. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that there would be significant differences in perspective between trainees and established surgeons for the number of cases needed to reach each skill level and what they felt are the most valuable training tools. METHODS: Orthopedic attending physicians and trainees were asked to complete a questionnaire assessing participant demographics, case volumes required to reach defined skill levels (novice, safe, competent, proficient, and expert), and the efficacy of various learning methodologies for elbow arthroscopy. The value of educational methods was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = not at all valuable; 5 = extremely valuable). RESULTS: The study population consisted of 323 total participants, of whom 224 (69.3%) were attending surgeons and 99 (30.7%) were trainees (resident or fellow physicians). According to the attending physicians, the mean numbers of cases needed to reach each skill level were 19 to be safe, 42 to be competent, 93 to be proficient, and 230 to be expert. These case numbers were not significantly different from the perspectives of trainees. Across the respondents, there were no significant differences in the number of cases needed to reach each level of skill based on the respondents' level of training, years of experience, type of fellowship, or self-reported skill level.Although both groups highly valued live surgery (4.7 of 5) and cadaveric practice (4.6 of 5) for acquiring skill, attendings placed higher value on reading (4.0 vs. 3.3, P < .001), videos/live demos (4.2 vs. 3.6, P < .001), and formal courses (4.5 vs. 4.1, P < .001) than trainees. Both groups place relatively low value on surgical simulators (2.8-3.6). CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable agreement among attending surgeons and trainees in terms of the number of cases needed to attain various skill levels of elbow arthroscopy, which was consistent regardless of fellowship background, self-reported skill level, career length, and elbow arthroscopy case volume. However, there was some disagreement between attending surgeons and trainees over the most valuable methods for acquiring surgical skill with trainees placing less value on textbooks, surgical videos, and formal courses compared with attending surgeons. An understanding of the elbow arthroscopy learning curve will help trainees and their training programs establish case volume targets before safe, independent practice. Future studies should aim to clinically validate this learning curve.

Validation of the registration accuracy of navigation-assisted arthroscopic débridement for elbow osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The identification and precise removal of bony impingement lesions during arthroscopic débridement arthroplasty for elbow osteoarthritis is technically difficult. Surgical navigation systems, combined with preoperative 3-dimensional (3D) assessment of bony impingements, can provide real-time tracking of the surgical instruments and impingement lesions. This study aims to determine the registration accuracy of the navigation system for the humerus and ulna during elbow arthroscopy. METHODS: We tested the registration procedure using resin bone models of 3 actual patients with elbow osteoarthritis. We digitized bone surface points using navigation pointers under arthroscopy. We initially performed paired-point registration, digitizing 6 preset anatomical landmarks, and then refined the initial alignment with surface matching registration, digitizing 30 points. The registration accuracy for each trial was evaluated as the mean target registration error in each reference marker. Three observers repeated the registration procedure 5 times each with the 3 specimens (total, 45 trials). The median of the registration accuracy was evaluated in total (45 trials) as the accuracy of the registration procedure. The differences in the registration accuracy among the 3 observers (median of 15 trials) were also examined. RESULTS: The total registration accuracies were 0.96 mm for the humerus and 0.85 mm for the ulna. No significant differences were found in the registration accuracy for the humerus and ulna among the 3 observers. CONCLUSIONS: This arthroscopic-assisted registration procedure is sufficiently feasible and accurate for application of the navigation system to arthroscopic débridement arthroplasty in clinical settings.

The posterior interosseous nerve crosses the radial head midline and increases its distance from bony structures with supination of the forearm.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated whether forearm movements change the relative position of the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) with respect to the midline of the radial head (Rh) under direct arthroscopic observation. METHODS: The PIN was identified in 10 fresh frozen cadaveric specimens dissected under arthroscopy. The forearm was moved first in full pronation and then in full supination, and the displacement of the PIN from medial to lateral with respect to the midline of the Rh was recorded. The shortest linear distance between the nerve and the most anterior part of the Rh was measured with a graduated calliper inserted via the midlateral portal with the forearm in neutral position, full pronation, and full supination. RESULTS: The PIN was identifiable in all specimens. In all cases the PIN crossed the Rh midline with forearm movements, moving from medial in full pronation to lateral in full supination. The distance between the PIN and Rh is significantly greater in supination than in the neutral position and pronation (P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms that the PIN movement described in open surgery (medialization with pronation) also occurs during arthroscopy. The role of pronation in protecting the PIN in extra-articularprocedures is therefore confirmed. Supination, however, increases the linear distance between the PIN and Rh and should therefore be considered to increase the safe working volume whenever intra-articular procedures are performed on the anterolateral aspect of the elbow.

Ulnar trochlear notch articular surface has three morphological patterns: a neglected major anatomical feature.

PURPOSE: The typical anatomical illustration of the trochlear notch articular surface includes a transverse rough non-articular ridge which separates the olecranon and coronoid part of the joint. This transverse ridge, the "bare area", is not covered by cartilage and represents the optimal entry point for olecranon osteotomies. Aim of the present study was to encounter the anatomical variations in the morphology of the trochlear notch articular surface. METHODS: Two-hundred seventy-three dried ulnae were inspected and a qualitative classification of the variations of the trochlear notch articular surface was done. Correlation to gender and side was examined. RESULTS: Three distinct morphological patterns were observed. Separate olecranon and coronoid facets (Type I) were the most common pattern (165/273, 60.4%). Partial fusion of olecranon and coronoid facets (Type II) was observed in 75 out of 273 bones (27.5%), while a single olecranon and coronoid facet (Type III) was present in 33 out of 273 bones (12.1%). The occurrence of Type II and III was significantly more common in females (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The most common morphological pattern of the proximal ulna articular surface was the olecranon and coronoid facets separated by the transverse ridge, which is considered as the typical anatomical pattern. The partial fusion of olecranon and coronoid facets was the second most common pattern (27.5%) and the single olecranon and coronoid facet with no transverse ridge present was the rarest one (12.1%). These variations affect the area covered by cartilage. They are noticeable in an elbow MRI and they may have implications on olecranon osteotomy. Absence of the transverse ridge may confuse the surgeon during elbow arthroscopy.

Prospective outcome assessment of arthroscopic arthrolysis for traumatic and degenerative elbow contracture.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopic elbow release for both traumatic and degenerative contractures from intraoperative recording through the recovery time until final follow-up. METHODS: The study is based on 54 consecutive patients with extrinsic elbow contracture (traumatic in 31 and degenerative in 23) treated with arthroscopic arthrolysis by a single surgeon in 2011-2015. Range of motion (ROM) and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) were recorded preoperatively; intraoperatively; following release; and in the 1st, 3rd, 8th, 12th, and 26th weeks and at 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS: Significant improvements were noted in extension, flexion, and range of motion, measured both intraoperatively and at all follow-up visits. The greatest improvement in the range of motion was achieved at the time of surgery (from 89° ± 28° to 131° ± 14°, P < .001); it then decreased at 1 week to 103° ± 22° (P < .001) and slowly recovered to reach 124° ± 22° after 2 years. This was better than the preoperative value (P < .001) but worse than the intraoperative value (P = .002). A similar pattern was observed in both traumatic and degenerative contractures. The MEPS improved from 73 ± 12 preoperatively to 93 ± 14 at the final evaluation (P < .001). The ROM and MEPS results at every follow-up were comparable for both traumatic and degenerative contractures. ROM improved regardless of the severity of contracture. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis was similarly efficient in ROM restoration in both traumatic and degenerative contractures and regardless of the severity of contracture. After early deterioration, the achieved gain slowly recovers over a period of 6 months but may not recover to the ranges achieved during arthroscopy.