ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Arthroscopic Versus Open Elbow Debridements Among ABOS Part II Candidates: A Decline in Arthroscopic Volume yet Fewer Complications After Arthroscopic Procedures.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Loose body removal and debridement remain common indications for elbow arthroscopy. Purpose: To (1) identify trends in elbow arthroscopy versus open procedures for loose body removal and debridement among American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) Part II Oral Examination candidates and (2) compare the use of elbow arthroscopy among candidates with different fellowship training backgrounds. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A search of the ABOS Part II Oral Examination case list database was performed for elbow arthroscopy and open debridement Current Procedural Terminology codes between 2011 and 2021. Cases were stratified according to fellowship training data found in the ABOS Part II case list database. Annual rates of elbow procedures, patient demographics, surgeon geographic location, and complications were collected. Statistically significance was determined using chi-square testing, Fisher exact test or 2-tailed Results: A total of 1443 procedures, 1147 (79.5%) arthroscopic and 296 (20.5%) open, were identified and included. A decrease in arthroscopic cases was observed while open cases remained steady. Arthroscopic cases were performed in a younger patient population (39 ± 18.5 vs 41.7 ± 17.3 years respectively; Conclusion: In this study of patients treated by ABOS Part II Oral Examination candidates, with the largest population of patients undergoing elbow arthroscopy to date, rates of elbow arthroscopy have decreased over the past decade, although surgeons with sports medicine, hand and upper extremity, and/or shoulder and elbow fellowship training demonstrate a proclivity toward arthroscopic rather than open procedures. Overall rates of complication were lower following arthroscopic approaches in this cohort of surgeons.
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.