Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31211187›Full record

ReviewThe archives of bone and joint surgery2019

Clinical Outcomes of Open versus Arthroscopic Surgery for Lateral Epicondylitis, Evidence from a Systematic Review.

Ali Moradi, Pouria Pasdar, Hassan Mehrad-Majd, Mohammad H Ebrahimzadeh

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The archives of bone and joint surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ali MoradiOrthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Pouria PasdarOrthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Hassan Mehrad-MajdOrthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Mohammad H EbrahimzadehOrthopedic Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLateral epicondylitis (LE) also known as tennis elbow is a common disease of middle-aged population. Surgery is a treatment of choice in patients not responded to the conservative management. Open and arthroscopic release are the two main choices for LE surgery; however, an overall consensus is not available. This study was aimed to compare the clinical outcomes after conventional open and arthroscopic procedures.

methodsAn electronic search of databases including, Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus was conducted to identify all eligible studies describing the post-operative clinical outcomes of patients with LE, up to October 2018. All studies considering the non-pediatric cases who received at least 6-month preoperative conservative treatment and were followed more than 6 months after surgery were included. Data on patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, pain, and complication rates, were extracted for each study. If appropriate, the meta-analysis was performed to combine the results for all outcomes that were reported in a minimum of 3 studies utilizing the same surgical technique.

resultsA total of 34 eligible articles including 15 open studies, 13 arthroscopic studies, and 6 studies in both techniques were enrolled. Studies were from different parts of the world with a whole sample size of 1508 cases. Various outcome measuring methods including Quick DASH and VAS, and different clinical outcomes were reported. The results indicated no significant difference between arthroscopic and open surgery methods in terms of VAS, DASH score, time for returning to work, overall outcomes, and patients' satisfaction (

conclusionThe present study suggests that despite no superiority for each techniques regarding the pain relief, subjective function, and better rehabilitation, arthroscopic method have been associated with less complications.

Indexed as

ArthroscopyLateral epicondylitisOpen surgerySystematic reviewTennis elbow

Identifiers

PMID31211187
PMCPMC6510924
OpenAlexW2942435575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.