Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2025; 92(2):98-105 | DOI: 10.55095/achot2024/060

Comparison of the Results of Expanded Arthroscopic Debridement and 18-Gauge Percutaneous Tenotomy in Lateral EpicondylitisOriginal papers

İBRAHİM FARUK ADİGÜZEL1, HÜNKAR CAGDAS BAYRAK2, OSMAN ORMAN3, SAMED ORDU2
1 Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Ankara, Turkey
2 Eskisehir Yunus Emre State Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Eskisehir, Turkey
3 İstanbul Baltalimani Bone and Joint Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey

Purpose of the study: This retrospective comparative study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and complication rates associated with two minimally invasive surgical techniques: extended arthroscopic debridement and 18-gauge percutaneous tenotomy.

Material and methods: The study included 31 patients with resistant lateral epicondylitis who underwent either arthroscopic debridement (n=14) or percutaneous tenotomy (n=17) between January 2019 and June 2023. Outcomes were assessed using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) at preoperative, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month intervals. Additionally, a detailed cost analysis was performed to compare the economic implications of both surgical techniques.

Results: The results demonstrated significant improvements in both groups at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. However, by the 12-month follow-up, the arthroscopic group maintained stable clinical outcomes, while the percutaneous group showed a decline in MEPS and PRTEE scores, suggesting a potential regression in long-term efficacy. Despite this, the percutaneous tenotomy group benefited from a shorter procedure time, fewer complications, and a quicker return to work, making it a highly cost-effective alternative.

Conclusions: In conclusion, while extended arthroscopic debridement offers sustained clinical benefits, particularly in long-term follow-up, 18-gauge percutaneous tenotomy emerges as a viable primary intervention due to its simplicity, low complication rate, and significant cost savings. Future studies with larger cohorts and longer follow-up periods are warranted to further elucidate the long-term effectiveness and patient satisfaction associated with these techniques.

Keywords: lateral epicondylitis, elbow arthroscopy, percutaneous tenotomy.

Received: October 5, 2024; Revised: October 5, 2024; Accepted: October 21, 2024; Published: June 1, 2025  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
ADİGÜZEL İF, BAYRAK HC, ORMAN O, ORDU S. Comparison of the Results of Expanded Arthroscopic Debridement and 18-Gauge Percutaneous Tenotomy in Lateral Epicondylitis. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2025;92(2):98-105. doi: 10.55095/achot2024/060. PubMed PMID: 40862377.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Ahmad Z, Siddiqui N, Malik SS, Abdus-Samee M, Tytherleigh-Strong G, Rushton N. Lateral epicondylitis: a review of pathology and management. Bone Joint J. 2013;95:1158-1164. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    2. Boyer MI, Hastings H 2nd. Lateral tennis elbow: "Is there any science out there?". J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999;8:481-491. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    3. Burke NG, Mullett H. Arthroscopic tennis elbow release. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011;93:435-436. Go to original source...
    4. Clark T, McRae S, Leiter J, Zhang Y, Dubberley J, MacDonald P. Arthroscopic Versus open lateral release for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Arthroscopy. 2018;34:3177-3184. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    5. Cummins CA. Lateral epicondylitis: in vivo assessment of arthroscopic debridement and correlation with patient outcomes. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34:1486-1491. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    6. Hones KM, Cueto RJ, Ndjonko LC, Raymond BT, Buchanan TR, Aibinder WR, Srinivasan RC, Wright TW, King JJ, Hao KA. Establishing the diagnosis of radial tunnel syndrome: a systematic review of published clinical series. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024;34:2813-2821. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    7. Ikonen J, Lähdeoja T, Ardern CL, Buchbinder R, Reito A, Karjalainen T. Persistent tennis elbow symptoms have little prognostic value: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022;480:647-660. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    8. Lenoir H, Mares O, Carlier Y. Management of lateral epicondylitis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019;105:S241-S246. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    9. Li H, Yang XD, Xue X, Zhang Q, Ye L, Hua Y, Zhou X. Arthroscopic extensor carpi radialis brevis tenotomy and debridement versus debridement alone for refractory lateral epicondylitis: Clinical and MRI evaluation. Orthop J Sports Med. 2022;10:23259671221092733. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. MacMahon PJ, Eustace SJ, Kavanagh EC. Injectable corticosteroid and local anesthetic preparations: a review for radiologists. Radiology. 2009;252:647-661. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Mattie R, Wong J, McCormick Z, Yu S, Saltychev M, Laimi KJP. Percutaneous needle tenotomy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review of the literature. PM R. 2017;9:603-611. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Nascimento AT, Claudio GK. Arthroscopic surgical treatment of recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis - A series of 47 cases. Rev Bras Ortop. 2016;52:46-51. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    13. Owens BD, Murphy KP, Kuklo TR. Arthroscopic release for lateral epicondylitis. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:582-587. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    14. Pomerantz ML. Complications of lateral epicondylar release. Orthop Clin North Am. 2016;47:445-469. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    15. Sanders TL, Maradit Kremers H, Bryan AJ, Ransom JE, Morrey BFJSH. Health care utilization and direct medical costs of tennis elbow: a population-based study. Sports Health. 2016;8:355-358. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    16. Savoie FH 3rd. Guidelines to becoming an expert elbow arthroscopist. Arthro- scopy. 2007;23:1237-1240. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    17. Sharma H, Thomas S. Percutaneous tenotomy of common extensor origin for lateral epicondylitis resistant to conservative treatment. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2010;1:23-25. Go to original source...
    18. Sharma V, Kumar A, Parashar A, Rai V, Kumar V, Udiwal H. Percutaneous teno- tomy for chronic tennis elbow: a minimally invasive technique with better outcomes - a case series. J Orthop Case Rep. 2024;14:125-130. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    19. Solheim E, Hegna J, Øyen JJATjoA, Surgery R. Arthroscopic versus open tennis elbow release: 3-to 6-year results of a case-control series of 305 elbows. Arthroscopy. 2013;29:854-859. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    20. Yang X, Ying L, Ying L, Zhang Q, Han D, Zhou X. Modified arthroscopic teno- tomy of the extensor carpi radialis brevis for refractory lateral epicondylitis: a cohort study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2024;33:536-543. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

    Return to the content