Holger Erne

Holger Erne

*This is an algorithmically generated author record based on publicly available information.

Current Organizations / Institutes

The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article


Holger Erne has a total of 19 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:


Latest Publications

  • Open Access

    Total Endoprosthesis Versus Lundborg´s Resection Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Trapeziometacarpal Joint Osteoarthritis

    by Holger Erne, Claudia Scheiber, Daniel Schmauss, Steffen Loew, Michael Cerny, Denis Ehrl, Verena Schmauss, Hans-Guenter Machens, Philipp Muhl

    Background: There exist various operative approaches for the treatment of trapeziometacarpal joint osteoarthritis. The aim of this study was to compare the results of Lundsborg’s resection arthroplasty (RA) with implantation of a total endoprosthesis. Patients and Methods: In this 2-center study, we retrospectively analyzed 71 patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the carpometacarpal I joint stage III according to the Eaton-Littler classification. Thirty-two patients underwent a Lundsborg’s RA group, and 39 patients received a total endoprosthesis of the carpometacarpal I joint (TEP group). We evaluated operative time, DASH score, postoperative time until resolution of symptoms, pain level, pinch force, and satisfaction with the treatment. Results: Both groups had a similar mean length of follow-up of 42 months (TEP group) and 36 months (RA group). The final DASH score was significantly better in the TEP-group (10.1 versus 21.5 in the RA group; P ≤ 0.05). Also, the time interval from surgery till absence of any pain (1.5 versus 5.9 months) and the time of inability to work (6 versus 21 weeks) were significantly shorter for the TEP group compared with the RA group (P ≤ 0.05). The pinch force, pain intensity, and the satisfaction with the treatment were comparable (P > 0.05). The duration of the operation was significantly shorter in the RA group (31 min versus 65 min in the TEP group; P ≤ 0.05). Conclusion: Both techniques resulted in improved function of the operated hand and a clear reduction of symptoms. However, the implantation of a total endoprosthesis seems to have advantages, given a significantly better DASH score and a significantly shorter time until resolution of symptoms.


  • Resektionsarthroplastik nach Lundborg vs. Pyrocarbon-Spacer (Pyrocardan®) bei fortgeschrittener Rhizarthrose – Eine Zwei-Center-Studie

    by Holger C. Erne, Daniel Schmauß, Michael Cerny, Verena Schmauss, Denis Ehrl, Steffen Löw, Stefan Deiler

    Hintergrund Ziel dieser Studie an zwei Zentren war es, die Ergebnisse nach konventioneller Resektionsarthroplastik nach Lundborg mit der Implantation des Pyrocardan®-Spacers zu vergleichen. Patienten und Methoden Bei symptomatischer Rhizarthrose im Stadium III / IV nach Eaton und Littler wurde bei 12 Patienten eine Resektionsarthroplastik nach Lundborg durchgeführt (Zentrum 1) und bei 8 Patienten ein Pyrocardan®-Spacers implantiert (Zentrum 2). Beiden Gruppen waren bezüglich des Durchschnittsalters, des präoperativen Schmerzniveaus, des radiologischen Schweregrads der Arthrose nach Eaton-Littler und der Anamnesedauer bis zur Operation vergleichbar. Die Patientendaten wurden retrospektiv erhoben und eine Nachuntersuchung nach mehr als 18 Monaten postoperativ durchgeführt, bei der der DASH-Score, das Intervall bis zur Beschwerdefreiheit, das Schmerzniveau, die Griffkraft, die Pinchkraft und die Zufriedenheit mit der Behandlung erhoben wurden. Ergebnisse Beide Gruppen verzeichnen einen ähnlichen Nachbeobachtungszeitraum von 23,6 Monaten (Resektions-Gruppe) vs. 26,1Monaten (Spacer-Gruppe). Die Schnitt-Naht-Zeit betrug für die Resektions-Gruppe 31 min und für die Spacer-Gruppe 29 min. Der mittlere DASH betrug in der Resektions-Gruppe 21,9 und in der Spacer-Gruppe 18,3. Die VAS-Schmerzintensität betrug zum Nachuntersuchungszeitraum für die Spacer-Gruppe 1,5 und für die Resektions-Gruppe 1,0. Das zeitliche Intervall bis zur Beschwerdefreiheit war mit durchschnittlich 3,7 Monaten in der Spacer-Gruppe signifikant kürzer als in der Resektions-Gruppe 5,7. Die Griffkraft und Pinchkraft waren zwischen beiden Gruppen nicht signifikant unterschiedlich. Die Zufriedenheit mit der Behandlung wurde in der Resektions-Gruppe mit durchschnittlich 9,3angegeben, in der Spacer-Gruppe mit 7,4. Schlussfolgerung Im Beobachtungsintervall von jeweils über 1,5 Jahren führten beide Techniken zu einer zufriedenstellenden Gebrauchsfähigkeit und deutlich reduzierten Beschwerdesymptomatik der operierten Hand. Die Implantation des Pyrocardan®-Spacers scheint im Vergleich zur Resektionsarthroplastik leichte Vorteile bezüglich eines kürzeren Zeitraums bis zur kompletten Ausheilung zu haben. Auf der anderen Seite stehen die Materialkosten des Spacers von mehreren Hundert Euro, die bei einer konventionellen Resektionsarthroplastik nicht anfallen. Background Various operative approaches exist for osteoarthritis of the trapeziometacarpal joint. The aim of this two-centre study was to compare the results of Lundsborg’s resection arthroplasty with the implantation of the Pyrocardan® spacer. Patients and methods We treated 20 patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis of the trapeziometacarpal joint in stage III / IV (Eaton-Littler classification). Twelve patients received Lundsborg’s resection arthroplasty (centre 1), and in 8 patients a Pyrocardan® spacer was implanted (centre 2). Both groups were comparable regarding patients´ age, the preoperative pain level, the osteoarthritis stage according to Eaton-Littler, and the duration from the onset of symptoms until surgery. Patient data were retrospectively collected from patient records, and we performed a follow-up examination at least 18 months postoperatively, thereby evaluating the DASH sore, the postoperative time until freedom of symptoms, the pain level according to the visual analogue scale, grip force (Jamar dynamometer), pinch force, and patients’ treatment satisfaction (0–10; 10 = highest satisfaction). Results Both groups had a similar length of follow-up with 23.6 ± 5.2 months for the resection group and 26.1 ± 4.0 months for the spacer group. The duration of the operation was 31 ± 5 min for the resection group and 29 ± 7 min for the spacer group (p > 0.05). The DASH score was 21.9 ± 6.2 in the resection group and 18.3 ± 5.0 in the spacer group (p > 0.05). The pain level at the current follow-up was 1.5 ± 0.83 in the spacer group and 1.0 ± 0.74 in the resection group (p > 0.05). The time until freedom of symptoms was significantly shorter in the spacer group with 3.7 ± 1.9 months compared to the resection group with 5.7 ± 3.1 months (p = 0.0001). Grip force and pinch force were not significantly different between both groups. Treatment satisfaction was 9.3 ± 1.6 in the resection group and 7.4 ± 3.0 in the spacer group (p > 0.05). Conclusion Over a follow-up period of 1.5 years, both techniques resulted in a satisfactory usability of the operated hand and a clear reduction of symptoms. The implantation of the Pyrocardan® spacer seems to have slight advantages regarding a shorter time until freedom of symptoms. However, the implantation of the spacer is associated with additional material costs of a few hundred Euros, which are not incurred in resection arthroplasties. The implantation of the Pyrocardan® spacer seems to have slight advantages regarding a shorter time until freedom of symptoms.


  • The required minimum length of video sequences for obtaining a reliable interobserver diagnosis in wrist arthroscopies

    by Steffen Löw, Holger Erne, Alexander Schütz, Christoph Eingartner, Christian K. Spies

    To examine the relationship between video length for wrist arthroscopy and interobserver reliability.