A comparison of open and percutaneous techniques in the surgical treatment of tennis elbow.
We conducted a prospective, randomised, controlled trial of 45 patients (47 elbows), with tennis elbow, who underwent either a formal open release or a percutaneous tenotomy. All patients had pre- and post-operative assessment using the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scoring system. Both groups were followed up for a minimum of 12 months. Statistical analyses using the Mann-Whitney U test and repeated measured ANOVA showed significant improvements for patient satisfaction (p = 0.012), time to return to work (p = 0.0001), improvements in DASH score (p = 0.001) and improvement in sporting activities (p = 0.046) in the percutaneous group. Those patients undergoing a percutaneous release returned to work on average three weeks earlier and improved significantly more quickly than those undergoing an open procedure. The percutaneous procedure is a quicker and simpler procedure to undertake and produces significantly better results.
Department of Orthopaedics, Tameside Hospital, Ashton under Lyne, Manchester, England.
P D
PD
Dunkow
M
M
Jatti
B N
BN
Muddu
D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D004551:Elbow Joint / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013710:Tendons / Q000601:surgery*; D013716:Tennis Elbow / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome