TY - JOUR
T1 - Surgery for tennis elbow
T2 - a systematic review
AU - Bateman, Marcus
AU - Littlewood, Chris
AU - Rawson, Beth
AU - Tambe, Amol A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The British Elbow & Shoulder Society.
PY - 2019/2/1
Y1 - 2019/2/1
N2 - Background: There is no consensus on the most suitable treatment for tennis elbow but, in the USA, surgical intervention is increasing despite a lack of supportive research evidence. The aim of this systematic review was to provide a balanced update based on all relevant published randomized controlled trials conducted to date. Methods: An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, BNI, AMED, PsycINFO, HBE, HMIC, PubMed, TRIP, Dynamed Plus and The Cochrane Library was complemented by hand searching. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and data were synthesized narratively, based on levels of evidence, as a result of heterogeneity. Results: Twelve studies of poor methodological quality were included. The available data suggest that surgical interventions for tennis elbow are no more effective than nonsurgical and sham interventions. Surgical technique modifications may enhance effectiveness compared to traditional methods but have not been tested against a placebo. Conclusions: Current research evidence suggests that surgery for tennis elbow is no more effective than nonsurgical treatment based on evidence with significant methodological limitations. Given the recalcitrant nature of tennis elbow for some patients, further research in the form of a high-quality placebo-controlled surgical trial with an additional conservative arm is required to usefully inform clinical practice.
AB - Background: There is no consensus on the most suitable treatment for tennis elbow but, in the USA, surgical intervention is increasing despite a lack of supportive research evidence. The aim of this systematic review was to provide a balanced update based on all relevant published randomized controlled trials conducted to date. Methods: An electronic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, BNI, AMED, PsycINFO, HBE, HMIC, PubMed, TRIP, Dynamed Plus and The Cochrane Library was complemented by hand searching. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and data were synthesized narratively, based on levels of evidence, as a result of heterogeneity. Results: Twelve studies of poor methodological quality were included. The available data suggest that surgical interventions for tennis elbow are no more effective than nonsurgical and sham interventions. Surgical technique modifications may enhance effectiveness compared to traditional methods but have not been tested against a placebo. Conclusions: Current research evidence suggests that surgery for tennis elbow is no more effective than nonsurgical treatment based on evidence with significant methodological limitations. Given the recalcitrant nature of tennis elbow for some patients, further research in the form of a high-quality placebo-controlled surgical trial with an additional conservative arm is required to usefully inform clinical practice.
KW - elbow
KW - surgery
KW - systematic review
KW - tennis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075559697&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075559697&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1758573217745041
DO - 10.1177/1758573217745041
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85075559697
SN - 1758-5732
VL - 11
SP - 35
EP - 44
JO - Shoulder and Elbow
JF - Shoulder and Elbow
IS - 1
ER -