Tianxiao Ma1, Dongyue Wang1, Yuqing Hu1, Xiaocui Zhao2, Wei Wang3, Lihua Song4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The General Hospital of Jizhong Energy Xingtai Mining Group, NO.202 Bayi Street, Xingtai, Hebei, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Xiangjiang Area of the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The General Hospital of Jizhong Energy Xingtai Mining Group, NO.202 Bayi Street, Xingtai, Hebei, People's Republic of China. wangweiydsy1@163.com. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The General Hospital of Jizhong Energy Xingtai Mining Group, NO.202 Bayi Street, Xingtai, Hebei, People's Republic of China. slh9536@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of a mini-transverse incision with a bush-hook versus a conventional open incision for carpal tunnel release (CTR). METHODS: This was a prospective study. The decision to receive either technique (mini-transverse incision with a bush-hook or conventional open incision) was primarily based on patients' choice. Patients' symptom severity, functional status, and symptomatic pain were measured at pre-operation, 1 month, and 3 and 6 months postoperatively, and any relevant complications were recorded. Kelly's scale was used to evaluate the overall clinical efficacy. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included in the open CTR group and 85 patients in the mini-transverse incision group. The mini-transverse incision group had a significantly smaller incision (4.4±0.6 vs 44.8±3.7 mm), shorter surgical time (7.8±1.9 vs 21.2±3.4 min), and shorter hospital stay (3.7±1.6 vs 5.9±2.0 days) than did the open CTR group. Both groups showed significant improvements from baseline levels (all P<0.001). At postoperative 1 month and 3 months, the transverse incision group showed a significantly better VAS, SSS, and FSS (all P<0.05), but the difference was non-significant at 6 months except for FSS (P=0.022). Also, mini-transverse incision showed a significantly reduced time to return to work and activities, trend to a higher rate of excellence, and good and fewer complications than did the open CTR. CONCLUSIONS: The mini-transverse incision exhibited better performance in surgery-related measures, symptomatic remission, functional recovery, and postoperative morbidity, thus could be considered a promising technique alternative.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of a mini-transverse incision with a bush-hook versus a conventional open incision for carpal tunnel release (CTR). METHODS: This was a prospective study. The decision to receive either technique (mini-transverse incision with a bush-hook or conventional open incision) was primarily based on patients' choice. Patients' symptom severity, functional status, and symptomatic pain were measured at pre-operation, 1 month, and 3 and 6 months postoperatively, and any relevant complications were recorded. Kelly's scale was used to evaluate the overall clinical efficacy. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients were included in the open CTR group and 85 patients in the mini-transverse incision group. The mini-transverse incision group had a significantly smaller incision (4.4±0.6 vs 44.8±3.7 mm), shorter surgical time (7.8±1.9 vs 21.2±3.4 min), and shorter hospital stay (3.7±1.6 vs 5.9±2.0 days) than did the open CTR group. Both groups showed significant improvements from baseline levels (all P<0.001). At postoperative 1 month and 3 months, the transverse incision group showed a significantly better VAS, SSS, and FSS (all P<0.05), but the difference was non-significant at 6 months except for FSS (P=0.022). Also, mini-transverse incision showed a significantly reduced time to return to work and activities, trend to a higher rate of excellence, and good and fewer complications than did the open CTR. CONCLUSIONS: The mini-transverse incision exhibited better performance in surgery-related measures, symptomatic remission, functional recovery, and postoperative morbidity, thus could be considered a promising technique alternative.