Faysal Altahawi1, Xin Li2, Brittani Demarest1, Michael C Forney3. 1. Section of Musculoskeletal Imaging, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, Mail Code A21, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. 2. Pennsylvania Hospital, University of Pennsylvania, 800 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA. 3. Section of Musculoskeletal Imaging, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Ave, Mail Code A21, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. forneym@ccf.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes in patients treated for chronic common extensor tendinosis with percutaneous ultrasonic tenotomy (TX-1 device) versus surgical tenotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Outcomes from consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous tenotomy with the TX-1 device were compared with outcomes from consecutive patients who underwent surgical tenotomy. Patients were contacted to retrospectively assess their outcomes at 4 time points: before treatment, 2 weeks after treatment, 3 to 6 months after treatment, and 12 months after treatment. Outcomes were assessed using the quick disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand score (QuickDASH) and the Oxford elbow score (OES). Student's t tests were used to compare postprocedural versus preprocedural scores and percutaneous versus surgical tenotomy scores. RESULTS: Response rates were 23 of 43 and 10 of 47 for surveyed percutaneous and surgical tenotomy patients, respectively. There were significant improvements from preprocedural scores in all primary outcome measures at 3-to-6-month and 12-month time points for both procedures. No significant changes from preprocedural scores were seen for either procedure at 2 weeks after treatment or between percutaneous and surgical tenotomy in preprocedural or postprocedural scores for any outcome measure. At 2 weeks, improved percutaneous tenotomy scores approached significance compared with percutaneous preprocedural QuickDASH (p = 0.060) and surgical 2-week OES function domain (p = 0.074) scores. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonic percutaneous tenotomy with the TX-1 device and surgical tenotomy have similar outcomes for chronic common extensor tendinosis, with significant symptomatic improvement occurring after 3 to 6 months. Larger studies are needed to assess for differences at 2 weeks.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes in patients treated for chronic common extensor tendinosis with percutaneous ultrasonic tenotomy (TX-1 device) versus surgical tenotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Outcomes from consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous tenotomy with the TX-1 device were compared with outcomes from consecutive patients who underwent surgical tenotomy. Patients were contacted to retrospectively assess their outcomes at 4 time points: before treatment, 2 weeks after treatment, 3 to 6 months after treatment, and 12 months after treatment. Outcomes were assessed using the quick disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand score (QuickDASH) and the Oxford elbow score (OES). Student's t tests were used to compare postprocedural versus preprocedural scores and percutaneous versus surgical tenotomy scores. RESULTS: Response rates were 23 of 43 and 10 of 47 for surveyed percutaneous and surgical tenotomy patients, respectively. There were significant improvements from preprocedural scores in all primary outcome measures at 3-to-6-month and 12-month time points for both procedures. No significant changes from preprocedural scores were seen for either procedure at 2 weeks after treatment or between percutaneous and surgical tenotomy in preprocedural or postprocedural scores for any outcome measure. At 2 weeks, improved percutaneous tenotomy scores approached significance compared with percutaneous preprocedural QuickDASH (p = 0.060) and surgical 2-week OES function domain (p = 0.074) scores. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonic percutaneous tenotomy with the TX-1 device and surgical tenotomy have similar outcomes for chronic common extensor tendinosis, with significant symptomatic improvement occurring after 3 to 6 months. Larger studies are needed to assess for differences at 2 weeks.