Dear Editor,

We read with great interest the study of Bonczar M. et al. titled “Evaluation of lateral epicondylopathy, posterior interosseous nerve compression, and plica syndrome as co-existing causes of chronic tennis elbow” [1]. The authors conducted a great prospective study on concomitant pathologies with tennis elbow (TE) and we congratulate the authors. Their results showed that over 40% of chronic TE patients have co-existing posterior interosseous nerve compression or plica syndrome or both of them. These co-existing pathologies cause inefficiency in the treatment of TE if they are missed. However, we noticed an inconsistency in the number of patients included in the study and the number of patients in the tables and figures.

The authors reported that they included 31 of 50 patients with chronic unilateral TE after excluding 19 patients from the study. In the introduction section, material methods, results section, and Table 1, the number of the patients was reported as 31, but there were 32 patients in Fig. 2 (18 + 2 + 5 + 6 + 1 = 32), Tables 2 and 3 (12 + 20 = 32), and Table 4 (N = 32). Furthermore, percentages in Fig. 2 and the coexistence of sources of the lateral elbow section are consistent with 32 patients, not 31 (e.g., 13 patients of 31 is 41.9%, not 40.7%). We would like to ask the authors whether there is inconsistency in the article or do we misunderstand the numbers.

Once again, we complement the authors for their work and we think the readers will benefit from it.