Literature DB >> 8408148

Carpal tunnel release. A prospective, randomized assessment of open and endoscopic methods.

R A Brown1, R H Gelberman, J G Seiler, S O Abrahamsson, A J Weiland, J R Urbaniak, D A Schoenfeld, D Furcolo.   

Abstract

To define the role of two-portal endoscopic carpal-tunnel release as a method for the treatment of compression of the median nerve at the wrist, a prospective, randomized, multicenter study was performed on 169 hands in 145 patients. Either open or endoscopic carpal-tunnel release was performed in all of the patients who had clinical signs and symptoms consistent with carpal tunnel syndrome, had not responded to or had refused non-operative management, and had had electrodiagnostic studies consistent with carpal tunnel syndrome. Follow-up evaluations were performed at twenty-one, forty-two, and eighty-four days. At the end of the follow-up period, both the open and endoscopic methods had resulted in high levels of achievement of the primary outcomes (relief of pain and paresthesias). The numbness and paresthesias were relieved in eighty (98 per cent) of eighty-two hands in the open-release group compared with seventy-seven (99 per cent) of seventy-eight hands in the endoscopic-release group. This parameter was not recorded for three hands in the open-release group or six hands in the endoscopic-release group. The satisfaction of the patients with the procedure, graded on a scale of 0 to 100 per cent, averaged 84 per cent in the open-release group compared with 89 per cent in the group that had had endoscopic release. We found no significant differences between the two groups with regard to the secondary quantitative-outcome measurements, including two-point discrimination, postoperative interstitial-pressure data for the carpal canal, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament testing, and motor strength. The open technique resulted in more tenderness of the scar than did the endoscopic method. Thirty-two (39 per cent) of eighty-two hands in the open-release group and fifty (64 per cent) of seventy-eight hands in the endoscopic-release group were not tender at eighty-four days. This parameter was not recorded for three hands in the open-release group and six hands in the endoscopic-release group. The open method also resulted in a longer interval until the patient could return to work (median, twenty-eight days, compared with fourteen days for the open-release and endoscopic-release groups). Four complications occurred in the endoscopic carpal-tunnel release group: one partial transection of the superficial palmar arch, one digital-nerve contusion, one ulnar-nerve neuropraxia, and one wound hematoma.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8408148     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199309000-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  70 in total

Review 1.  Carpal tunnel syndrome: modern diagnostic and management techniques.

Authors:  N Kanaan; R A Sawaya
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Mechanical behavior of carpal tunnel subsynovial connective tissue under compression.

Authors:  Jessica E Goetz; Thomas E Baer
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2011

3.  Single portal endoscopic carpal tunnel release: modification of Menon's technique and data from 65 cases.

Authors:  Alvin Chao-Yu Chen; Meng-Huang Wu; Chung-Hsun Chang; Chun-Ying Cheng; Kuo-Yau Hsu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  The Japanese experience with endoscopic carpal tunnel release.

Authors:  Kazufumi Sano
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 2.314

5.  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

6.  The Cup of Diogenes: a fixed anatomical landmark for carpal tunnel surgery.

Authors:  Matthew T Houdek; Eric R Wagner; Alexander Y Shin
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2015-04-09

7.  Long-term outcomes of carpal tunnel release: a critical review of the literature.

Authors:  Dexter Louie; Brandon Earp; Philip Blazar
Journal:  Hand (N Y)       Date:  2012-09

8.  The diagnosis and treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome.

Authors:  Brent Graham
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-06-24

9.  Study to assess differences in outcome following open carpal tunnel decompressions performed by surgeons of differing grade.

Authors:  S Akhtar; S Sinha; M J Bradley; F D Burke; S E F Wilgis; N H Dubin
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 1.891

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.