Functional Outcome of Open Surgical Release Versus Percutaneous Release of Tennis Elbow.

Authors

  • Bidur Gyawali Department of Orthopedics, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Lagankhel, Lalitpur,
  • Toya Raj Bhatta Department of Orthopedics, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Lagankhel, Lalitpur,
  • Tej Prakash Dawadi Department of Orthopedics, Manmohan Memorial Medical College and Teaching Hospital Swoyambhu,
  • Suman Kumar Shrestha Department of Orthopedics, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Lagankhel, Lalitpur,
  • Dhirga Raj RC Department of Orthopedics, Civil Service Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal.
  • Nabees Man Singh Pradhan Department of Orthopedics, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Lagankhel, Lalitpur,

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3126/mjsbh.v14i1.14878

Keywords:

open release, percutaneous release, tennis elbow.

Abstract

Introduction: Tennis Elbow is a familiar term used to describe myriad of symptoms around the lateral aspect of the elbow. It occurs more frequently in non-athletes than athletes. Tennis elbow has a reported prevalence of 2% in the general population. It is most commonly seen in patients between the ages of 30 and 50 years. Tennis Elbow is considered resistant if it fails to respond to conservative means of treatment for at least six months.

Methods: Patients meeting the criteria were divided randomly into two groups of open surgical release and percutaneous release using random number generator software and respective surgery was done. Functional score, time to return to pre-injury status and patient satisfaction were noted at two months and six months follow up.

Results: Among 62 patients (34 female, 28 male) enrolled, 32 patients (mean age 42.5 years) were allocated to open group and 30 patients (mean age 44.2 years) were allocated to percutaneous group. At two months follow up, 81% of open group had excellent to good score and 19% of cases had fair score as compared to 90% cases of percutaneous group with excellent to good score and 10%with fair score (p = 0.376). At six months follow up, both open and percutaneous group had 90% excellent to good results and 10% fair results (p = 0.596). The mean time to return to work of open release was 6.03 weeks and percutaneous release was 2.3 weeks (p = 0.0001).

Conclusions: Percutaneous release and open surgical release in surgical management of resistant tennis elbow have statistically similar functional outcome. The time to return to work after percutaneous release is significantly earlier.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract
619
PDF
559

Author Biography

Bidur Gyawali, Department of Orthopedics, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Lagankhel, Lalitpur,

 

 

Downloads

Published

2016-05-09

How to Cite

Gyawali, B., Bhatta, T. R., Dawadi, T. P., Shrestha, S. K., RC, D. R., & Pradhan, N. M. S. (2016). Functional Outcome of Open Surgical Release Versus Percutaneous Release of Tennis Elbow. Medical Journal of Shree Birendra Hospital, 14(1), 16–19. https://doi.org/10.3126/mjsbh.v14i1.14878

Issue

Section

Original Articles