SynthesisOrthopaedic surgery2023
Is There any Difference in Clinical Outcome between Open and Arthroscopic Treatment for Tennis Elbow? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Orthopaedic surgery, 2023. 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, 18 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
- Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy Versus Local Corticosteroid Injection for Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Pooled 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
- Surgical management of recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis: indications, techniques, and outcomes.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2026Article
- Simultaneous Open Surgical Release for Coexistent Lateral and Medial Epicondylitis in the Same Elbow: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Arthroscopic Biportal Visualization and "Precise Resection" for Recalcitrant Lateral Epicondylitis Lesion.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and nutraceutical supplementation in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- A comparative meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of arthroscopic versus open surgery in patients with lateral epicondylitis.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Arthroscopic Repair of Extensor Carpi Radialis Brevis in Patients With Tennis Elbow.Arthroscopy techniques · 2024Article
- Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Special Issue.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
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 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is considerable controversy regarding the optimal approach (open vs arthroscopic) of releasing and/or debridement for the treatment of tennis elbow (TE). The aim of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes of the two techniques by quantitatively synthesizing outcome data. The study was performed by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and Elsevier databases between January 1995 and April 2022 for a minimum follow-up of 6 months. The searching strategy was "(tennis elbow [Title/Abstract] OR lateral epicondylitis [Title/Abstract]) AND (open [Title/Abstract] OR arthroscopic [Title/Abstract] OR release [Title/Abstract] OR debridement [Title/Abstract] OR surgery [Title/Abstract])". The quality of each study was investigated using the Coleman Methodology Score. In total, 1411 (693 open, 718 arthroscopic) elbows in 1392 patients who underwent releasing and debridement for tennis elbow were identified. The mean Coleman Methodology Score for the included studies was 55.2 ± 8.6 (open: 55.0 ± 9.4, arthroscopic: 55.8 ± 8.2). Improved clinical results were achieved after treatment with either open or arthroscopic treatment. The surgical success rate was 95.6% in open surgery and 92.4% in arthroscopic management. The complication rates were 2.2% and 1.5% for open and arthroscopic procedures, respectively. Similar subjective and objective outcomes, and surgical success rate were observed in patients with both techniques. Patients who had undergone arthroscopic release seemed to return to work earlier (5.3 weeks vs 7.1 weeks). To draw more definite conclusions, high-quality long-term follow-up randomized controlled trials are needed.
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.