Literature DB >> 12931807

Carpal tunnel release. A prospective, randomised study of endoscopic versus limited-open methods.

K C Wong1, L K Hung, P C Ho, J M W Wong.   

Abstract

Endoscopic carpal tunnel release has the advantage over open release of reduced tissue trauma and postoperative morbidity. Limited open carpal tunnel release has also been shown to have comparable results, but is easier to perform and is safer. We have compared the results of both techniques in a prospective, randomised trial. Thirty patients with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome had simultaneous bilateral release. The technique of release was randomly allocated to either two-portal endoscopic release (ECTR) or limited open release using the Strickland instrumentation (LOCTR). The results showed that the outcome was similar at follow-up of one year using both techniques. However, the LOCTR group had significantly less tenderness of the scar at the second and fourth postoperative week (p < 0.01). There was also less thenar and hypothenar (pillar) pain after LOCTR. Subjective evaluation showed a preference for LOCTR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12931807

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  31 in total

1.  Similar effectiveness of the open versus endoscopic technique for carpal tunnel syndrome: a prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Seyit Ali Gümüştaş; Burcu Ekmekçi; Haci Bayram Tosun; Mehmet Müfit Orak; Halil İbrahim Bekler
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2015-08-30

Review 2.  Analysis of reporting return to work in studies comparing open with endoscopic carpal tunnel release: A review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Olubimpe Ayeni; Achilleas Thoma; Ted Haines; Sheila Sprague
Journal:  Can J Plast Surg       Date:  2005

3.  Application of the CONSORT statement to randomized controlled trials comparing endoscopic and open carpal tunnel release.

Authors:  Achilleas Thoma; Roderick T Chew; Sheila Sprague; Karen Veltri
Journal:  Can J Plast Surg       Date:  2006

Review 4.  Diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of the carpal tunnel syndrome: a review.

Authors:  Calogero Alfonso; Stefano Jann; Roberto Massa; Aldo Torreggiani
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2010-02-10       Impact factor: 3.307

5.  Open versus endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Eli T Sayegh; Robert J Strauch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  [Injury to the median nerve after minimally invasive decompression: discrepancy between the surgical report and actual course of surgery].

Authors:  B Kernt; J Neu
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 7.  Carpal tunnel syndrome.

Authors:  Nigel L Ashworth
Journal:  BMJ Clin Evid       Date:  2010-03-23

8.  Simultaneous Bilateral Versus Staged Bilateral Carpal Tunnel Release: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  Kevin W Park; Martin I Boyer; Richard H Gelberman; Ryan P Calfee; Jeffrey G Stepan; Daniel A Osei
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.020

9.  Optimal management of carpal tunnel syndrome.

Authors:  Shimpei Ono; Philip J Clapham; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2010-08-30

10.  Endoscopic carpal tunnel release is preferred over mini-open despite similar outcome: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Ho Jung Kang; Il Hyun Koh; Tae Jin Lee; Yun Rak Choi
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-10-26       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.