Literature DB >> 27418887

Endoscopic Versus Open Cubital Tunnel Release: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Salah Aldekhayel1, Alexander Govshievich1, James Lee1, Youssef Tahiri1, Mario Luc1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several surgical techniques exist for treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome. Endoscopic cubital tunnel release (ECTuR) has been recently reported as a promising minimally invasive technique. This study aims to compare outcomes and complications of open cubital tunnel release (OCTuR) and ECTuR in the treatment of idiopathic cubital tunnel syndrome.
METHODS: A systematic review of the literature (1980-2014) identified 118 citations. Studies including adults with idiopathic cubital tunnel treated exclusively by ECTuR or OCTuR were included. Outcomes of interest were postoperative grading, complications, number of reoperations, and the need for intraoperative conversion to another technique. Postoperative outcomes were combined into a uniform scale with 4 categories: "excellent," "good," "fair," and "poor."
RESULTS: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria (17 observational and 3 comparative), representing 425 open and 556 endoscopic decompressions. In the open group, 79.8% experienced "good" or "excellent" results with 12% complication rate and 2.8% reoperation rate. In the endoscopic group, 81.8% experienced "good" or "excellent" results with 9% complication rate and 1.6% reoperation rate. Meta-analysis of 3 comparative studies demonstrated a significantly lower overall complication rate with ECTuR. Subgroup analysis of complications revealed a significantly higher incidence of scar tenderness and elbow pain with OCTuR.
CONCLUSIONS: The current study demonstrates similar effectiveness between the endoscopic (ECTuR) and open (OCTuR) techniques for treatment of idiopathic cubital tunnel syndrome with similar outcomes, complication profiles, and reoperation rates.

Entities:  

Keywords:  compression neuropathy; cubital tunnel; endoscopic; ulnar nerve

Year:  2016        PMID: 27418887      PMCID: PMC4920515          DOI: 10.1177/1558944715616097

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hand (N Y)        ISSN: 1558-9447


  31 in total

1.  Ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: predictive value of clinical and electrophysiological measurements for surgical outcome.

Authors:  M Mondelli; F Giannini; P Morana; S Rossi
Journal:  Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2004-09

2.  The endoscopic management of cubital tunnel syndrome.

Authors:  R Hoffmann; M Siemionow
Journal:  J Hand Surg Br       Date:  2005-10-12

3.  Injury to the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve during cubital tunnel surgery.

Authors:  A L Dellon; S E MacKinnon
Journal:  J Hand Surg Br       Date:  1985-02

4.  The cubital tunnel syndrome: treatment with simple decompression.

Authors:  R G Miller; E E Hummel
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  1980-06       Impact factor: 10.422

5.  Prospective randomized controlled study comparing simple decompression versus anterior subcutaneous transposition for idiopathic neuropathy of the ulnar nerve at the elbow: Part 1.

Authors:  Ronald H M A Bartels; Wim I M Verhagen; Gert Jan van der Wilt; Jan Meulstee; Leo G M van Rossum; J André Grotenhuis
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 6.  Treatment for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow.

Authors:  Pietro Caliandro; Giuseppe La Torre; Roberto Padua; Fabio Giannini; Luca Padua
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-07-11

7.  The management of cubital tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis of clinical studies.

Authors:  A Mowlavi; K Andrews; S Lille; S Verhulst; E G Zook; S Milner
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 4.730

8.  Decompression without anterior transposition: an effective minimally invasive technique for cubital tunnel syndrome.

Authors:  M Pavelka; M Rhomberg; D Estermann; W N Löscher; H Piza-Katzer
Journal:  Minim Invasive Neurosurg       Date:  2004-04

9.  Endoscopic decompression of the ulnar nerve at the elbow.

Authors:  Uros Ahcan; Peter Zorman
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.230

10.  Outcome study of ulnar nerve compression at the elbow treated with simple decompression and an early programme of physical therapy.

Authors:  P A Nathan; R C Keniston; K D Meadows
Journal:  J Hand Surg Br       Date:  1995-10
View more
  6 in total

1.  A Comprehensive Review of Cubital Tunnel Syndrome.

Authors:  Danyon Anderson; Bison Woods; Tunde Abubakar; Colby Koontz; Nathan Li; Jamal Hasoon; Omar Viswanath; Alan D Kaye; Ivan Urits
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2022-09-15

2.  Comparison of Surgical Encounter Direct Costs for Three Methods of Cubital Tunnel Decompression.

Authors:  Nikolas H Kazmers; Evangelia L Lazaris; Chelsea M Allen; Angela P Presson; Andrew R Tyser
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  Sonographic Follow-Up of Patients With Cubital Tunnel Syndrome Undergoing in Situ Open Neurolysis or Endoscopic Release: The SPECTRE Study.

Authors:  Stefano Lucchina; Cesare Fusetti; Marco Guidi
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2019-07-11

Review 4.  Ulnar Neuropathy at the Elbow: From Ultrasound Scanning to Treatment.

Authors:  Kamal Mezian; Jakub Jačisko; Radek Kaiser; Stanislav Machač; Petra Steyerová; Karolína Sobotová; Yvona Angerová; Ondřej Naňka
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2021-05-14       Impact factor: 4.003

5.  Classification and Treatment of Ulnar Nerve Subluxation Following Endoscopic Cubital Tunnel Release.

Authors:  Ather Mirza; Justin B Mirza; Terence L Thomas
Journal:  J Hand Surg Glob Online       Date:  2020-06-23

6.  Symptom Recurrence After Endoscopic Cubital Tunnel Release.

Authors:  Koji Takamoto; Tuna Ozyurekoglu
Journal:  J Hand Surg Glob Online       Date:  2020-04-28
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.