Dataset Information

The effects of vitamin D supplementation in carpal tunnel syndrome treatment outcomes: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Vitamin D deficiency is related to carpal tunnel syndrome symptoms. Correcting vitamin D levels by supplementation was supposed to improve carpel tunnel symptoms, though there is a lack of aggregated data about treatment outcomes. This study aimed to examine whether vitamin D supplementation could improve the treatment outcomes in carpal tunnel syndrome patients.

Methods

A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for articles on vitamin D and carpel tunnel syndrome from January 2000 to March 2021 was performed. The article screening and data extraction were performed by two investigators independently with blinding to decisions on selected studies. All included studies had assessed the quality of evidence using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) scoring system.

Results

We retrieved four studies that met the eligibility criteria. The treatment outcomes were evaluated by visual analog scale (124 wrists), functional scores (176 patients), muscle strength (84 patients), and nerve conduction velocity (216 wrists). After vitamin D supplementation, two studies reported improved pain scores and nerve conduction velocity, and three studies showed enhancement of functional status.

Conclusion

Vitamin D administration could offer favorable outcomes in pain improvement, better functional status, and increased sensory conduction velocity in carpal tunnel syndrome. However, there is to date no recommendations concerning a standardized dose or duration of vitamin D administration in carpal tunnel syndrome; prescribing vitamin D at the usual appropriate dose is suggested as an additional treatment in patients with mild to moderate carpel tunnel symptoms.

Level of evidence

Level IV, therapeutic study.

SUBMITTER: Anusitviwat C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8421488 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCarpal tunnel syndrome is a common disorder in hand surgery practice. Both surgical and conservative interventions are utilized for the carpal tunnel syndrome. Although certain indications would specifically indicate the need for surgery, there is a spectrum of patients for whom either treatment option might be selected. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the efficacy of surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome with conservative treatment.MethodsWe included all controlled trials written in English, attempting to compare any surgical interventions with any conservative therapies. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2010), MEDLINE (1980 to June 2010), EMBASE (1980 to June 2010), PEDro (searched in June 2010), international guidelines, computer searches based on key words and reference lists of articles. Two reviewers performed study selection, assessment of methodological quality and data extraction independently of each other. Weighted mean differences and 95% confidence intervals for patient self-reported functional and symptom questionnaires were calculated. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals for electrophysiological studies and complication were also calculated.ResultsWe assessed seven studies in this review including 5 RCTs and 2 controlled trials. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from moderate to high. The weighted mean difference demonstrated a larger treatment benefit for surgical intervention compared to non surgical intervention at six months for functional status 0.35( 95% CI 0.22, 0.47) and symptom severity 0.43 (95% CI 0.29, 0.57). There were no statistically significant difference between the intervention options at 3 months but there was a benefit in favor of surgery in terms of function and symptom relief at 12 months (0.35, 95% CI 0.15, 0.55 and 0.37, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.56). The RR for secondary outcomes of normal nerve conduction studies was 2.3 (95% CI 1.2, 4.4), while RR was 2.03 (95% CI 1.28 to 3.22) for complication, both favoring surgery.ConclusionBoth surgical and conservative interventions had treatment benefit in carpal tunnel syndrome. Surgical treatment has a superior benefit, in symptoms and function, at six and twelve months. Patient underwent surgical release were two times more likely to have normal nerve conduction studies but also had complication and side effects as well. Given the treatment differential and potential for adverse effects and that conservative interventions benefitted a substantial proportion of patients, current practice of a trial of conservative management with surgical release for severe or persistent symptoms is supported by evidence.

Project description:Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a condition that affects the main nerves in the wrist area that causes numbness, tingling, and weakness in the hand and arm. CTS affects 5% of the general population and results in pain in the wrist due to repetitive use, most commonly affecting women and office workers. Conservative management of CTS includes neurodynamic modulation to promote median nerve gliding during upper limb movements to maintain normal function. However, evidence for the benefits of neurodynamic modulation found disparities, and hence, the effectiveness of neurodynamic modulation remains unclear. This study aimed to systematically review the current evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish the effectiveness of neurodynamic techniques as a non-surgical treatment option for CTS. Using the PRISMA guidelines, two authors searched four electronic databases, and studies were included if they conformed to pre-established eligibility criteria. Primary outcome measures included outcomes from the Boston carpal tunnel syndrome questionnaire, while secondary outcomes included nerve conduction velocity, pain, and grip strength. Quality assessment was completed using the Cochrane RoB2 form, and a meta-analysis was performed to assess heterogeneity. Twelve RCTs met our inclusion/exclusion criteria with assessments on 1003 participants in the treatment and control arms. High heterogeneity and some risks of bias were observed between studies, but the results of the meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in our primary outcome, the Boston carpal tunnel syndrome questionnaire-symptom severity scale (mean difference = -1.20, 95% CI [-1.72, -0.67], p < 0.00001) and the Boston carpal tunnel syndrome questionnaire-functional severity scale (mean difference = -1.06, 95% CI [-1.53, -0.60], p < 0.00001). Secondary outcomes such as sensory and motor conduction velocity increased significantly, while motor latency was significantly reduced, all positively favoring neurodynamic techniques. Pain was also significantly reduced, but grip strength was not significantly different. Our systematic review demonstrates significant benefits of neurodynamic modulation techniques to treat CTS and specifically that it reduces symptom severity, pain, and motor latency, while at the same time improving nerve conduction velocities. Hence, our study demonstrates a clear benefit of neurodynamic techniques to improve recovery CTS.

Project description:The Endoscopic Release of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (ECTR) is a minimal invasive approach for the treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. There is scepticism regarding the safety of this technique, based on the assumption that this is a rather "blind" procedure and on the high number of severe complications that have been reported in the literature.To evaluate whether there is evidence supporting a higher risk after ECTR in comparison to the conventional open release.We searched MEDLINE (January 1966 to November 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to November 2013), the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (November 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, issue 11 in The Cochrane Library). We hand-searched reference lists of included studies. We included all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials (e.g. study using alternation, date of birth, or case record number) that compare any ECTR with any OCTR technique. Safety was assessed by the incidence of major, minor and total number of complications, recurrences, and re-operations.The total time needed before return to work or to return to daily activities was also assessed. We synthesized data using a random-effects meta-analysis in STATA. We conducted a sensitivity analysis for rare events using binomial likelihood. We judged the conclusiveness of meta-analysis calculating the conditional power of meta-analysis.ECTR is associated with less time off work or with daily activities. The assessment of major complications, reoperations and recurrence of symptoms does not favor either of the interventions. There is an uncertain advantage of ECTR with respect to total minor complications (more transient paresthesia but fewer skin-related complications). Future studies are unlikely to alter these findings because of the rarity of the outcome. The effect of a learning curve might be responsible for reduced recurrences and reoperations with ECTR in studies that are more recent, although formal statistical analysis failed to provide evidence for such an association.I.

Project description:BackgroundCarpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common peripheral nerve entrapment disease. Either surgical or conservative intervention for CTS patients is needed to choose. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy, safety, and cost of surgical versus nonsurgical intervention.MethodsThe eligible studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Google, and Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by 2 of the coauthors independently and were analyzed by RevMan5.3. Standardized mean differences (SMDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess risk of bias.ResultsThirteen studies including 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 observational studies were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from moderate to high. The difference of clinical efficacy was statistically significant between surgical and nonsurgical intervention, and nonsurgical treatment was more effective (OR = 2.35, 95%CI = 1.18-4.67, P = 0.01). Meanwhile, different results were discovered by subgroup analysis. The pooled results of function improvement, symptom improvement, neurophysiological parameters improvement, and cost of care at different follow-up times showed that the differences were not statistically significant between the 2 interventions. The difference of complications and side-effects was statistically significant and conservative treatment achieved better result than surgery (OR = 2.03, 95%CI = 1.28-3.22, P = 0.003). Sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results.ConclusionBoth surgical and conservative interventions had benefits in CTS. Nonsurgical treatment was more effective and safety than surgical treatment, but there were no significant differences in function improvement, symptom improvement, neurophysiological parameters improvement, and cost of care. Nonsurgical treatment is recommended as the optical choice for CTS. If conservative treatment fails, surgical release can be taken.