Temporin-K

Purpose: To qualify and quantify the changes in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signals in the extensor tendons after arthroscopic debridement for lateral epicondylitis and evaluate the association between MRI findings and temporal clinical results by comparisons between recovered and unrecovered cases. Methods: Thirty-four patients with refractory lateral epicondylitis treated with arthroscopic debridement were divided into recovered (n = 24) and unrecovered (n = 10) groups according to the Japanese Orthopaedic Association-Japan Elbow Society score. This study included any patients who underwent both the pre- and postoperative MRI and excluded patients with a previous history of any elbow surgery. Pre- and postoperative MRI findings were qualitatively categorized into 4 grades, quantified by measuring the percentage of tendinopathy area, and compared between the groups. Results: Preoperatively, grading scores and percentages did not show significant differences between groups (P = .050 and .519). The respective numbers of patients with grades 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 1 (4%), 3 (13%), 10 (42%), and 10 (42%) in the recovered group; and 1 (10%), 2 (20%), 7 (70%), and 0 (0%) in the unrecovered group. The average percentages in the recovered and unrecovered groups were 42.3% (73.9 mm2/168.4 mm2); and 36.5% (50.5 mm2/131.0 mm2). However, postoperatively, they were significantly lower in the recovered group than in the unrecovered group (P = .007 and .014). The numbers and percentages in the recovered and unrecovered groups were 15 (63%), 8 (33%), 1 (4%), and 0 (0%) and 17.0% (28.6mm2/169.8mm2) and 2 (20%), 3 (30%), 5 (50%), and 0 (0%) and 30.5% (39.0 mm2/131.8 mm2). Conclusions: Qualitative and quantitative MRI is useful for evaluating the progress of tendon healing after arthroscopic debridement. In the recovered and unrecovered groups, improvement of tendinopathy area were 60% versus 16%, indicating that postoperative MRI findings reflect clinical outcomes. Level of evidence: IV, case series with subgroup analysis.

Background: Arthroscopic release for the stiff elbow has been widely used, but there are no reports limited to severe stiffness. The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcomes of severe cases. Materials and methods: Ten patients with 10 severely stiff elbows defined by a limited arc of ≤ 60° underwent this arthroscopic release. Causes of stiffness were post-traumatic stiffness (one patient), osteoarthritis (three patients), and rheumatoid arthritis (six patients). Using arthroscopy, the capsule contracture and the intra-articular fibrosis were removed and the impinging osteophyte and part of the radial head were resected. For four patients with preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms or contracture of the posterior oblique ligament of the medial collateral ligament, mini-open ulnar nerve neurolysis and release of the posterior oblique ligament were performed. Patients were followed up for an average of 24 months. Results: Arthroscopic release could be performed without any intraoperative complications. Range of motion for the elbow significantly improved from 95° of flexion and - 55° of extension to 109° of flexion and - 32° of extension. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score also improved from 56 points to 80 points. Two patients underwent a second arthroscopic surgery and gained further arc of motion. One patient showed osteophyte reformation and needed revision open surgery 1 year after the initial surgery. Conclusions: Arthroscopic release for the severely stiff elbow could improve range of motion. Careful attention should be given during surgery to avoid complications such as intramuscular bleeding or nerve damage.

We treated humeroradial joint disorder in rheumatoid elbows with arthroscopic partial excision of the radial head, in which the radial head is minimally resected under arthroscopy to ensure adequate joint space and articular congruity. To examine the effect of this method, we investigated outcomes using a retrospective case series. The hypothesis of this study was that this method decreases symptoms related to the humeroradial joint and ensures articular congruity. Since 2008, we have performed arthroscopic partial excision of the radial head for 14 patients (15 rheumatoid elbows) with more than 2 years of follow-up. Surgical indications for this method were motion pain with crepitus around the humeroradial joint and joint narrowing and sclerosis on plain radiography. After synovectomy, the surface of the radial head was resected 4 to 5 mm under arthroscopy, ensuring adequate joint space and articular congruity. Osteophyte removal and anterior capsular release were performed if necessary. At the final follow-up of 54 months, pain around the humeroradial joint had resolved in all cases. Range of motion improved from 115° flexion, -39° extension, 55° pronation, and 54° supination preoperatively to 127° flexion, -27° extension, 60° pronation, and 65° supination postoperatively. The articular congruity of the humeroradial joint was well maintained at final follow-up, with the exception of 2 cases in which the space decreased after 4 years. Arthroscopic partial excision of the radial head is a promising procedure for improvement of humeroradial symptoms. This method is effective, even for advanced cases, and should be considered before total arthroplasty. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(4):209-214.].