Dataset Information

Comparison of Wrist Arthroscopy, Small Incision Surgery, and Conventional Surgery for the Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Retrospective Study at a Single Center.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of wrist arthroscopy, small incision surgery, and conventional open carpal tunnel release surgery for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (n=111) were treated with wrist arthroscopy (n=33), small incision surgery (n=40), and conventional open carpal tunnel release surgery (n=38). Incision length, duration of surgery, degree of intraoperative bleeding, recovery time, and findings at postoperative follow-up at one month, three months, and six months after surgery were recorded. Assessment included the two-point discrimination test, the grip and pinch strength test, the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, the Levine questionnaire, and Kelly's therapeutic evaluation. RESULTS Incision length, duration of surgery, intraoperative bleeding, and recovery time were significantly reduced in the wrist arthroscopy group and the small incision surgery group compared with the conventional surgery group (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in the two-point discrimination or grip and pinch strength test (p>0.05). Postoperatively, at one month, the VAS score, Levine score, and Kelly's therapeutic evaluation in the wrist arthroscopy group and the small incision surgery group were significantly lower compared with the conventional surgery group (p<0.05). Scar length and scar tenderness in the conventional surgery group were significantly increased compared with the wrist arthroscopy group and the small incision surgery group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Wrist arthroscopy, small incision surgery, and conventional open carpal tunnel release surgery were effective for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome, but conventional surgery resulted in more postoperative complications.

SUBMITTER: Teng X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6563648 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of Wrist Arthroscopy, Small Incision Surgery, and Conventional Surgery for the Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Retrospective Study at a Single Center.

Teng Xiaofeng X Xu Jihai J Yuan Huizong H He Xinkun X Chen Hong H

Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research 20190603

<strong>BACKGROUND</strong> This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of wrist arthroscopy, small incision surgery, and conventional open carpal tunnel release surgery for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. <strong>MATERIAL AND METHODS</strong> Patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (n=111) were treated with wrist arthroscopy (n=33), small incision surgery (n=40), and conventional open carpal tunnel release surgery (n=38). Incision length, duration of surgery, degree of intraoperat ...[more]

PMID: 31155608

Similar Datasets

Project description:Trial designThe prospective randomized controlled trial.BackgroundThis study compares outcomes in terms of early postoperative anterior wrist pain and time to return to work or activities of daily living of patients who underwent carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) release with short incision and those who had minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with CTS kits.MethodsA total of 24 patients diagnosed with primary CTS confirmed with electrodiagnosis at an academic university hospital were randomly assigned into one of two groups of 12 patients each: a short incision group and an MIS with tool-kit group using computer-generated block randomization (block of four). Sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes were used in the allocation concealment process. In the short incision group, skin was incised longitudinally from Kaplan's line to the area distal to transverse wrist crease (2.5-4.0 cm) while in the tool-kit group, an incision of less than 2.5 cm. was made using special MIS-CTS kits. Primary outcomes evaluated include visual analogue scale (VAS) measurement of pain intensity in the anterior carpal area both while at rest and while conducting daily activities at the 2nd week postoperatively as well as the time to return to activities of daily living and work. Improvement in the Michigan hand questionnaire (MHQ) score, a secondary outcome, was also measured at the 2nd week postoperatively. Patients, allocator and outcome assessor were blinded.ResultsDemographic data, including preoperative electrodiagnostic severity and occupation, were similar in the two groups. There were no significant differences in terms of VAS of the early postoperative anterior carpal area at rest (p > 0.99), while conducting daily activities (p = 0.89) and time to return to activities of daily living (p = 0.46) and work (p = 0.24). The MHQ score improvement at the 2nd week postoperatively showed no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.95). The MIS wound length in the tool-kit group was significantly shorter than in the short incision group (1.95 vs 2.92 cm, p < 0.01).ConclusionsThere is no difference in early postoperative anterior wrist pain, time to return to work or to activities of daily living between the surgical techniques. Short incision is recommended for benefit in term of cost-effectiveness, while MIS with tool-kit could be preferred in patients who concerned in cosmetic appearance between the surgical techniques.Trial registrationwww.Clinicaltrialsin.th (TCTR20200530003). Registered 30 May 2020.

Project description:Background: For patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), the only long-term effective treatment option is carpal tunnel release surgery. Up to one-third report recurrent symptoms, and 12% needs repeated surgery. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term effects of mechanical traction as a non-invasive treatment option for CTS compared to care as usual. Methods: Patients with electrodiagnostically confirmed CTS [N = 181; mean age, 58.1 (13.0) years; 67% women] were recruited from an outpatient neurology clinic in the Netherlands. Patients completed baseline questionnaires and randomized to the intervention group (12 treatments with mechanical traction, twice a week for 6 weeks) or care as usual. The primary clinical outcome measure was surgery during the 12-month follow-up. Secondly, we assessed symptom severity with the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) at baseline and at the 12-month follow-up. Changes in CTS symptom severity between baseline and the 12-month follow-up were analyzed between groups using t-tests and a multiple linear regression analyses, adjusting for duration of complaints, age, gender, and symptom severity at baseline. Results: At the 12-month follow-up, 35 of 94 (37%) patients in the intervention group had surgery, compared to 38 of 87 (44%) in the care-as-usual group ( χ12 = 0.78, p = 0.377). Symptom severity and functional status scores did not significantly differ between the intervention (n = 81) and care-as-usual group (n = 55) at follow-up. For patients who did not have surgery, BCTQ scores decreased significantly more from baseline to the 12-month follow-up in the intervention group (n = 53) compared to patients in the care-as-usual group (n = 25). For patients who did not have surgery, belonging to the intervention group and a higher BCTQ score at baseline were related to a greater decrease in BCTQ scores from baseline to the 12-month follow-up, as well as symptom severity and functional status. Conclusions: Mechanical traction is effective in reducing symptom severity compared to current conservative treatment options in standard care and can therefore benefit the large number of patients that prefer conservative treatment for CTS. Clinical Trial Registration: Clinical Trials NL44692.008.13. Registered 19 September 2013, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01949493.

Project description:BackgroundCarpal tunnel syndrome is a common nerve compression disorder which affects hand sensation and function. Carpal tunnel release surgery (CTR) is frequently performed to alleviate these symptoms. For many CTR patients, surgery occurs during their working lifetime, but there is currently no evidence-based guidance to inform clinicians or patients when it might be safe to return to different types of work afterwards. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the return to work experiences of patients who had recently undergone CTR.MethodsSemi-structured 1:1 interviews were conducted with a subgroup of participants recruited to a multi-centre prospective cohort study. Interviewees were purposely selected to represent a range of demographic, clinical and occupational characteristics. All had recently undergone CTR and had returned to work. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the framework method. Participants were recruited until data saturation was achieved.ResultsFourteen participants were interviewed: 11 women (median age 49 years, range 27-61) and 3 men (age range 51-68 years). Three key themes were identified. Theme 1 centred on the level of functional disability experienced immediately after surgery. There was an expectation that CTR would be a 'minor' procedure, but this did not match the participants' experiences. Theme 2 explored the desire for validation for the time away from work, with participants recalling a need to justify their work absence to themselves as well as to their employers. Theme 3 focused on the participants' reflections of handing their return to work and function, with many reporting uncertainties about what constituted appropriate activity loads and durations. There was a desire for specific information relating to individual work roles.ConclusionIndividual return to work decision-making was largely influenced by the recommendations received. According to the views of participants, clinicians may be able to prepare patients better pre-operatively, especially with respect to function in the immediate post-operative period and by providing return to work guidance that can be tailored for individual work roles.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Choosing Wisely Top-5 list of activities to avoid includes "Don't obtain baseline laboratory studies in patients without significant systemic disease (ASA I or II) undergoing low-risk surgery - specifically complete blood count, basic or comprehensive metabolic panel, coagulation studies when blood loss (or fluid shifts) is/are expected to be minimal." Accordingly, we define low-value preoperative tests (LVTs) as those performed before minor surgery in patients without significant systemic disease. The objective of the current study was to examine the extent, variability, drivers, and costs of LVTs before carpal tunnel release (CTR) surgeries in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA). METHODS:Using fiscal year (FY) 2015-2017 data derived from the VHA Corporate Data Warehouse (CDW), we determined the overall national and facility-level rates and associated costs of receiving any of 8 common LVTs in the 30 days before CTR in ASA physical status (PS) I-II patients. We also examined the patient, procedure, and facility factors associated with receiving ?1 LVT with mixed-effects logistic regression and the number of tests received with mixed-effects negative binomial regression. RESULTS:From FY15-17, 10,000 ASA class I-II patients received a CTR by 699 surgeons in 125 VHA facilities. Overall, 47.0% of patients had a CTR that was preceded by ?1 LVT, with substantial variability between facilities (range = 0%-100%; interquartile range = 36.3%), representing $339,717 in costs. Older age and female sex were associated with higher odds of receiving ?1 LVT. Local versus other modes of anesthesia were associated with lower odds of receiving ?1 LVT. Several facilities experienced large (>25%) increases or decreases from FY15 to FY17 in the proportion of patients receiving ?1 LVT. CONCLUSIONS:Counter to guidance from the ASA, we found that almost half of CTRs performed on ASA class I-II VHA patients were preceded by ?1 LVT. Although the total cost of these tests is relatively modest, CTR is just one of many low-risk procedures (eg, trigger finger release, cataract surgery) that may involve similar preoperative testing practices. These results will inform site selection for qualitative investigation of the drivers of low-value testing and the development of interventions to improve preoperative testing practice, especially in locations where rates of LVT are high.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Wrist Arthroscopy, Small Incision Surgery, and Conventional Surgery for the Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Retrospective Study at a Single Center.

Publications

Comparison of Wrist Arthroscopy, Small Incision Surgery, and Conventional Surgery for the Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Retrospective Study at a Single Center.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets