Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon repair is necessary for arthroscopic treatment of refractory lateral epicondylitis of the elbow: a prospective randomized comparative study.
Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of arthroscopic debridement and extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) tendon repair with suture anchor reattachment versus arthroscopic debridement alone in patients with refractory lateral epicondylitis (LE).
methodsFrom January 2016 to December 2022, 56 eligible patients with recalcitrant LE underwent either arthroscopic debridement alone (Group A, n = 26) or arthroscopic ECRB repair (Group B, n = 30). Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, grip strength measurement, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36).
resultsThere was no difference in preoperative demographics between two groups (P > 0.05). The mean follow-up duration was 29.9 ± 4.8 months (range, 25–38 months) in Group A and 30.4 ± 5.2 months (range, 24–39 months) in Group B. At the final follow-up, both groups showed significant improvements in MEPS, DASH, VAS, and grip strength (P < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in postoperative VAS scores or elbow range of motion between two groups (P > 0.05). However, Group B demonstrated superior MEPS (95.1 ± 8.6 vs. 83.6 ± 8.4, P < 0.001), DASH (9.4 ± 2.3 vs. 17.5 ± 3.2, P < 0.001), grip strength (44.54 ± 10.53 kg vs. 34.12 ± 9.69 kg, P < 0.001), and SF-36 scores (PCS: 52.8 ± 5.7 vs. 45.6 ± 5.1; MCS: 54.7 ± 6.1 vs. 46.1 ± 5.8; P < 0.05) compared to Group A at the final follow-up. No serious complications requiring reoperation were encountered in both groups during the follow-up period.
conclusionsArthroscopic ECRB tendon repair with suture anchor reattachment provided significantly better functional recovery, grip strength preservation, and quality-of-life outcomes compared to debridement alone in refractory LE. While both techniques could alleviate pain effectively, tendon repair may be prioritized for patients requiring optimal functional restoration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective randomized comparative study, Level Ⅱ.
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.