Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment-specific outcome of surgical
therapy of chondromatosis of the elbow with special attention on the complication
and recurrence rate as well as induction of secondary osteoarthritis. Methods: A consecutive patient group from 1989 to 2003 was evaluated retrospectively and followed
up clinically and radiologically. Special attention was paid to locking and catching,
swelling, pain, loose bodies, and signs of osteoarthritis. In the case of a causal
pathology, mostly osteoarthritis, the condition was classified as secondary; otherwise,
it was classified as primary. The following scores were calculated: modified American
Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire for elbows; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder
and Hand questionnaire; and Short Form 36. Results: Of 24 patients operated on, 19 (79%) were followed up after 56 months (range, 11
to 177 months). Of these, 10 were primary types and 9 secondary types. The extension
deficit of 12° preoperatively decreased to −9°, and pain was significantly (P = .001) reduced. Postoperatively, 1 patient still reported occasional locking and
1 patient had swelling. In both patients no loose bodies could be identified by radiography.
Comparison of the arthroscopic and open techniques showed a trend toward a shorter
rehabilitation time of 2.4 months after arthroscopic intervention, in contrast to
4.6 months for an open procedure, and a trend toward higher patient satisfaction after
arthroscopy. Comparison of the primary and secondary forms showed significantly (P = .042) better pain reduction for primary chondromatosis. Of the patients with distinct
preoperative osteoarthritis, 44% showed ongoing osteophytic growth; there were no
cases of new osteoarthritis. Conclusions: Both open and arthroscopic approaches give satisfactory results with a trend toward
shorter rehabilitation and higher patient satisfaction for the arthroscopic approach.
Osteoarthritis is not induced and there is no danger of recurrence in the medium term.
Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic, retrospective comparative study.
Key Words
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to ArthroscopyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- An immunohistological study of cartilage and synovium in primary synovial chondromatosis.J Pathol. 1992; 166: 277-281
- Synovial osteochondromatosis: A histopathological study of thirty cases.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1977; 59: 792-801
- Primary synovial chondromatosis.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982; : 178-186
- Surgery for synovial chondromatosis.Acta Orthop Scand. 1990; 61: 567-569
- Synovial osteochondromatosis involving the elbow.AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1976; 127: 347-348
- Synovial osteochondromatosis of the elbow.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002; 84: 961-966
- Primary synovial chondromatosis of the elbow.J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2000; 9: 319-322
- Synovial osteochondromatosis of the elbow presenting with ulnar nerve neuropathy.Am J Orthop. 1996; 25: 843-844
- Arthroscopic treatment of synovial disorders in the shoulder, elbow, and ankle.J Knee Surg. 2002; 15: 57-59
- Arthroscopy of the elbow for synovial chondromatosis.J South Orthop Assoc. 2000; 9: 119-124
- Loose bodies in the elbow.Br J Surg. 1975; 62: 921-924
- Synovial chondromatosis.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988; 70: 807-811
- Primary synovial chondromatosis: A clinicopathologic review and assessment of malignant potential.Hum Pathol. 1998; 29: 683-688
- Comprehensive assessment of clinical outcome and quality of life after total elbow arthroplasty.Arthritis Rheum. 2005; 53: 73-82
- A standardized method for assessment of elbow function.J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999; 8: 351-354
- Measuring the whole or the parts?.J Hand Ther. 2001; 14: 128-146
- Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: The DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected].Am J Ind Med. 1996; 29: 602-608
- Overview of the SF-36 health survey and the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) project.J Clin Epidemiol. 1998; 51: 903-912
Article info
Publication history
Published online: February 13, 2008
Footnotes
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Note: To access the supplementary Table 3 accompanying this report, visit the May issue of Arthroscopy at www.arthroscopyjournal.org.
Identification
Copyright
© 2008 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
