• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.28-35
• /
• 2015

Background: We assessed the effectiveness of arthroscopic capsular release for the treatment of adhesive capsulitis. Further, we tried to ascertain the clinical benefits, if any, of pancapsular release over selective capsular release, where the two differ by performing or not performing a posterior capsular release, respectively. Methods: Thirty-five consecutive patients with either primary or secondary adhesive capsulitis who failed conservative treatment for more than 6 months were enrolled in the study. A total of 16 patients allocated in group 1 received a pancapsular release that comprises the release of the rotator interval, anteroinferior capsular, and the posterior capsular release, whereas 19 patients in group 2 received a selective capsular release that comprises only the release of the rotator interval release and anteroinferior capsular release. The clinical outcomes, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Constant score, and range of motion, were assessed preoperative and postoperatively. Results: In both groups, the preoperative VAS score, Constant score, and ROM showed a significant improvement by the 6-month follow-up. We found that the immediate postoperative internal rotation was significantly higher in group 1 than group 2. Despite significant differences seen between the two groups at the initial postoperative period, there were no significant differences in Constant score, VAS score, and the ROM at all the subsequent follow-ups between the two groups. Conclusions: Arthroscopic capsular release for the treatment of adhesive capsulitis is very effective. However, pancapsular release did not show any advantage over selective capsular release in terms of overall clinical outcome.

• 대한관절경학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2006.11a
• /
• pp.35-39
• /
• 2006

Posterior capsular tightness with glenohumeral internal rotation deficit is usually considered to be an acquired condition of the throwing shoulder and is usually treated conservatively. However, because posterior capsular tightness is sometimes irreversible, we have performed arthroscopic capsular release for painful throwing shoulder with posterior capsular tightness. The true loss of internal rotation and posterior stiffness was confirmed by examination with the patient under anesthesia, and contracture of the posterior capsule and the posterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligamant was observed arthroscopically. Because an extensive adhesion between the capsule and the fascia of the external rotators was noted, a capsular release was performed from 6 o'clock to 11 o'clock (in the right shoulder) to completely expose the muscle belly of the external rotators. Of the first 16 consecutive patients, 4 had no concomitant lesions and underwent posterior capsular release alone. With a minimum of 2 years' follow-up, it was ascertained that the throwing pain completely disappeared in 14 patients and improved in 2. In all, 11 patients returned to their preinjury performance level, and 5 returned to a lower level of function. In the 4 patients who had no concomitant lesions, throwing pain completely disappeared, and all were able to return to their preinjury performance level.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.117-125
• /
• 2017

Background: To compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic capsular release in patients with and without inferior capsular release for shoulder stiffness. Methods: Between January 2010 and December 2015, 39 patients who underwent arthroscopic capsular release for shoulder stiffness were enrolled and randomized into two groups. In group I, 19 patients underwent arthroscopic capsular release of the rotator interval and anterior capsule. In group II, 20 patients underwent arthroscopic capsular release of the anterior to inferior capsule, including the rotator interval. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Constant scoring system, Simple Shoulder Test, visual analogue scale for pain, and range of motion (ROM) were used for evaluation before surgery, at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery and on the last follow-up. Results: Preoperative demographic data revealed no significant differences (p>0.05). The average follow-up was 16.07 months. Both groups showed significantly increased ROM at the last follow-up compared with preoperative (p<0.05). At the last follow-up, no statistical differences were found (p>0.05) between groups I and II in functional scores and ROM (forward flexion, p=0.91; side external rotation, p=0.17; abduction external rotation, p=0.72; internal rotation, p=0.61). But we found that group II gained more flexion compared to group I at 3 months and 6 months (p<0.05) after the surgery. Conclusions: Both techniques of capsular release are effective for stiffness shoulder. However, the extended inferior capsular release shows superiority in forward flexion over anterior capsular release alone during 6 months of follows-up (level of evidence: Level I, therapeutic randomized controlled trial).

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.72-77
• /
• 1998

We treated 5 elbows with post-traumatic flexion contractures (mean contracture: 51 degrees) by arthroscopic anterior capsular release and post-operative alternative flexion and extension splint. Each elbow had been resistant to at least six months of conservative therapy. An incongruent ulno-humeral articulation was considered to be a contraindication to this procedure. All patients complained of the residual deformity and some functional deficit. All patients, after failure of non-operative therapy, desired a operative treatment. At follow-up(mean 21.8 months), there was a mean post-operative contracture of 19 degrees, which is within a functional range of motion. So we conclude that arthroscopic capsular release in selected patients is reasonable alternative to open release.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.169-177
• /
• 2020

Background: We evaluated the need for arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) in refractory primary frozen shoulder (FS) by comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated with ACR and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). Methods: We assessed patients with refractory primary FS, 57 patients (group A) who were treated with MUA and 22 patients (group B) who were treated with ACR. In group A, manipulation including a backside arm-curl maneuver was performed under interscalene brachial block. In group B, manipulation was performed only to release the inferior capsule before arthroscopic circumferential capsular release, which was carried out for the unreleased capsule after manipulation. Pain, range of shoulder motion, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score were recorded at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. We compared outcome variables between treatment groups and between diabetics and non-diabetics and also evaluated the numbers of patients receiving additional intra-articular steroid injection. Results: Outcome variables at 3 months after surgery and improvements in outcome variables did not differ between groups. Group A showed significantly better results than group B in the evaluation of pain and range of motion at 1 week. Diabetics showed comparable outcomes to non-diabetics for most variables. Eleven patients required additional steroid injections between 8 to 16 weeks after surgery: 12.2% in group A, 18.2% in group B. Additional injections were given three times more often in diabetics compared to non-diabetics. Conclusions: MUA alone can yield similar clinical outcomes to ACR in refractory FS.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.166-172
• /
• 2001

Purpose: To evaluate effectiveness of arthroscopic capsular release combined with manipulation in frozen shoulder. Material and Method: 15 patient who had failed to respond to physical therapy were evaluated, which were treated with arthroscopic capsular release combined with manipulation, from July 1998 to March 2000. Result: At a mean of fifteen months(range, six to twenty four) after the combined procedure, the improvement in the score of Constant and Murley averaged 45 points. The mean improvement in motion was 76 degrees for abduction; 40 degrees and 65 degrees for external rotation in adduction and abduction. Conclusion : Arthroscopic capsular release with manipulation is useful method to treatment the frozen shoulder which was not respond to conservative treatment.

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 1999.03a
• /
• pp.38-40
• /
• 1999

$\cdot$ Arthroscopic management is the effective method with acceptable results for coronoid impingement of stiff elbow contributing to the functional improvement and pain relief. $\cdot$ The functional improvement and pain relief seem to be affected by the severity of a degenerative change of the elbow joint. $\cdot$ Excision of coronoid process is required in a marked limitation of further flexion in addition to deeping of the coronoid fossa and anterior capsular release. $\cdot$ Excision of olecranon tip or posterior capsular release are effective method in severe flexion contracture.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.127-133
• /
• 2018

Background: This study was undertaken to evaluate the outcome of the arthroscopic capsular release for adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. Methods: This study retrospectively investigated thirty shoulders in 29 patients who presented with recalcitrant adhesive capsulitis and underwent arthroscopic treatments. Other than typical findings of adhesive capsulitis, combined pathologies in the glenohumeral joint and subacromial space were evaluated by arthroscopy. Clinical evaluations were performed using the Constant's score and ranges of motion (ROM) at preoperative, 6 months postoperatively and at the final follow-up. Results: Our study included 17 women and 12 men with a mean age of 53.8 years (range, 34-74). Mean follow-up duration was 24 months (range, 12-40 months). Assessment of combined pathologies revealed that partial rotator cuff tear of less than 25% thickness, was most common (overall 83.3%; with bursal 57% and articular 23%). Subacromial synovitis and adhesion were also frequent (53.3%). The Constant score and ranges of motion significantly improved at the final follow-up, compared with preoperative levels. However, clinical results at 6 months postoperatively were found to be significantly inferior to those observed at the final follow-up ($p{\leq}0.001$ for all factors). Functional impairment was the major complaint in 59.3% patients at the 6 months follow-up. Conclusions: Although arthroscopic capsular release yielded favorable outcome at the mean 24 months follow-up, pain and motion limitations at 6-month postoperatively persisted in more than 50% of our patients. While combined pathologies were commonly encountered during arthroscopy, although their effects on surgical outcome in adhesive capsulitis remains unclear in this study.

• 대한관절경학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2009.10a
• /
• pp.73-73
• /
• 2009

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2002.10a
• /
• pp.311-315
• /
• 2002