Objective To analyze the short-term effectiveness of repairing musculus extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB) and extensor digitorum communis (EDC) tendon using suture anchor after debridement of extensor tendon insertion for recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis. Methods Between March 2009 and May 2011, 10 patients (10 elbows) with recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis received repair of the ECRB and EDC tendon to the lateral epicondyle using a single suture anchor after debridement of extensor tendon insertion. There were 6 males and 4 females with an average age of 45.4 years (range, 36-57 years). The dominant elbow was involved in 8 patients and nondominant elbow in 2 patients; there were 4 manual workers and 6 ordinary workers. The disease duration ranged from 8 to 24 months (mean, 12.3 months). All patients had epicondylus lateralis humeri pain, local swelling and tenderness, and positive Mill sign. The average elbow range of motion (ROM) was 11.3°(range, 0-30°) in extension and was 132.5°(range, 120-145°) in flexion. Preoperative MRI showed external humeral epicondylitis in all patients. ResultsPrimary wound healing was obtained in all patients without complications of infection, leakage of joint fluid, and stiffness of elbow. Ten patients were followed up 4 to 23 months with an average of 12 months (more than 12 months in 7 cases). The time to return to work was (3.75 ± 0.95) months for manual workers and was (2.91 ± 0.20) months for ordinary workers, showing no significant difference (t=1.715, P=0.180). Compared with preoperation, the mean visual analogue scale (VAS) score significantly decreased (P lt; 0.05), and Mayo score and the grip strength of dominant and nondominant significantly increased (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference was found when compared with non-surgical side at last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). At last follow-up, the average ROM was —1.5° (range, 0-—10°) in extension and was 150.5°(range, 140-160°) in flexion. ConclusionTo suture anchor for repairing the ECRB and EDC after debridement is a satisfactory procedure to treat recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis. It can effectively prevent loss of the forearm extensor strength, relieve the pain, recover the grip strength, and obtain good results.
Objective To analysis the electrophysiological dominance weight of the triceps brachii muscle/extensordigitorum communis muscle innervated by brachial plexus and to conclude its effect on the ipsilateral C7 transfer so as to offer electrophysiological data for the safety and indication of i psilateral C7 transfer. Methods From August 2007 to October 2007, 15 patients with complete brachial plexus nerve root avulsion received contralateral C7 transfer. There were 13 males and 2 females aged 18-49 years (28 years on average). Injury was caused by fall ing in 1 case, by crush in 2 cases and by traffic accident in 12 cases, involving left side in 8 cases and right side in 7 cases. The upper, middle and lower trunk of the brachial plexus were stimulated respectively, the compound muscle action potential (CMAP) at the triceps brachii muscle/extensor digitorum communis muscle was recorded, and then the electrophysiological dominance weight of the triceps brachii muscle/extensor digitorum communis muscle innervated by brachial plexus was confirmed according to the comparison of the ampl itude percentage of the CMAP by three trunks. The muscle strength of triceps brachii muscle/extensor digitorum communis muscle was evaluated and the electromyogram was taken 6 months after operation. Results All patients were followed up for 6 months. Concerning the electrophysiological dominance weight, the triceps brachii muscle was mainly innervated by uppermiddle trunk in 3 cases (20%), by middle-lower trunk in 3 cases (20%), by whole trunk in 7 cases (47%) and by middle trunk in 2 cases (13%). While the extensor digitorum communis muscle was mainly innervated by middle-lower trunk in 3 cases (20%), by whole trunk in 10 cases (67%) and by lower trunk in 2 cases (13%). Concerning the triceps brachii muscle, 2 patients got the muscle strength of 4 grade with recruitment simple phase at 1 month after operation and returned to normal at 3 month after operation, while 13 patients got the muscle strength of 5 grade with recruitment simple or mixed phase at 1 month after operation. Concerning the extensor digitorum communis muscle, the muscle strength and the recruitment phase of all 15 patients recovered to normal at 1 month after operation. Conclusion To patients with various kinds of electrophysiological dominance weight, the cutting of C7 does not substantially damage the triceps brachii muscle or extensor digitorum communis muscle, indicating that the ipsilateral C7 transfer is safe and feasible. However, it should be appl ied prudently for the patients with high dominance weight since it may result in the short-term decrease of triceps brachii muscle strength.