SynthesisMedicine2019
Comparison of arthroscopic debridement and open debridement in the management of lateral epicondylitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Open and arthroscopic debridement for lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on comparative studies.European journal of medical research · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review of elbow arthroscopy complications : Complications, risk factors, and safety tips.International orthopaedics · 2022Pooled it
- Short- to mid-term clinical outcomes and return to sport and work after arthroscopic debridement of the extensor carpi radialis brevis in patients with chronic lateral epicondylopathy.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Article
- Comparative Efficacy of Arthroscopic and Open Lateral Release for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Randomized Trial Assessing Pain, Function, and Recovery.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2026Article
- A comparative meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of arthroscopic versus open surgery in patients with lateral epicondylitis.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Outcomes of Continued Intensive Conservative Treatment Versus Arthroscopic Extensor Carpi Radialis Brevis Release for Recalcitrant Lateral Epicondylitis: A Non-randomized Controlled Trial.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Open Debridement Alone Versus Open Debridement With Tendon Repair for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Comparison of Complications and 5-Year Reoperation Rates From a Large Insurance Database.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Validation of a novel magnetic resonance imaging classification and recommended treatment for lateral elbow tendinopathy.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Lateral Epicondylitis-Narrative Review on Surgical Options for Recalcitrant Cases.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2021Review
- Corticosteroids vs autologous blood injection for lateral epicondylitis: Study protocol for a cohort trial.Medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have reported that both arthroscopic debridement (AD) and open debridement (OD) of extensor carpi radialis brevis are effective in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Despite this, few studies have focused on the comparative outcomes of these 2 procedures. The aim of this study was to assess whether AD is superior to OD in managing lateral epicondylitis.
methodsA systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify relevant articles that were published in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases during January 2019. All studies comparing the efficacy of AD and OD in terms of failure rate, complication rate, and clinical outcome measures were included. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager.
resultsSix clinical trials were included in the current meta-analysis. There was no significant difference with regard to disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand scores, visual analog scale, and failure rate. There was a statistically significant difference in surgical time in favor of the OD (mean difference [MD], -11.45, 95% confidence interval [CI], -12.45 to -10.44, I = 0%, P < .001). There was no significant difference of complication rate between the OD group (0.6%) and the AD group (1.0%) (MD, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.12-3.06; P = .55)
conclusion: There was no significant difference between arthroscopic and open surgery with regards to failure rate, functional outcome score, and complication rate. The current meta-analysis found that arthroscopic surgery had a longer surgical time than open surgery for lateral epicondylitis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.