Comparison of ultrasound-guided pulsed radiofrequency versus steroid injection in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome

A narrative review of pulsed radiofrequency for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome

OBJECTIVE

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), which is the most common peripheral nerve entrapment syndrome, can commonly persist despite conservative treatment modalities such as wrist splinting or medications. Pulsed radiofrequency represents a minimally invasive pain intervention technique to alleviate pain. The literature was reviewed to establish the effectiveness of PRF therapy for CTS.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a narrative review of relevant articles on the effectiveness of PRF for CTS.

METHOD

Four databases, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, OVID Emcare, and Web of Science, were systematically searched. 804 records were screened, and the reference lists of eligible articles were examined. For this review, eight extracted studies were narratively explored.

RESULTS

One case report, three retrospective cohorts, one observational prospective study, and three randomized-controlled trials were included. PRF likely provides both an analgesic and functional benefit in patients with mild to severe CTS, and it also shows benefit as an adjunct to carpal tunnel release surgery. Long-term data is limited. It also appears likely that steroid injection may represent a comparable treatment modality to PRF, and there have been positive results when these modalities are used together. Notably, all studies differed in their methodology, making direct comparisons between studies challenging.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for PRF in the treatment of CTS, across the range of spectrum of severity or peri-operative to CTS surgery, appears favorable and avoids known side effects of steroid injections. Potential mechanisms for PRF and future directions for research are explored.

Neuromodulation of the median nerve in carpal tunnel syndrome, a single-blind, randomized controlled study

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of pulsed radiofrequency applied using transcutaneous electrodes in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

Methods

After randomization, the patients received two cycles of noninvasive pulsed radiofrequency (NiPRF), once weekly, or splinting (the control group) for three months. Clinical evaluations were recorded at baseline and weeks 4 and 8. The Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire (BCTQ) was used to determine the functional status and symptom severity.

Results

Sixty-two patients were followed up for three months. There was no difference between the groups in the BCTQ scores before and after treatment. The NiPRF group found a significant difference between the BCTQ measurements at all time intervals (paired sample t -test; P < 0.001). In the splint group, there was a significant difference only between the basal-1st month and basal-3rd month (paired samples t -test; P < 0.001). The main effect of the time variable was statistically significant (ANOVA; P < 0.001), but the group variable was not. There was no correlation between the BCTQ results measured at any time and the electroneuromyelogragphy findings in either group.

Conclusions

NiPRF effectively improves symptoms and functionality in patients with CTS for up to 3 months. Thus, NiPRF can be considered an easy, safe, and useful alternative treatment modality for CTS.

Local corticosteroid injection versus physical therapy for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The comparative effect of commonly used conservative treatments for carpal tunnel syndrome remained controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical effect of local corticosteroid injection and physical therapy for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library was conducted to identify relevant randomized clinical trials published before 21st Mar 2023. Two independent reviewers assayed quality of included studies using the Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool. Relevant data were extracted and pooled analyses were conducted. Outcome measurements included Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire, visual analogue scale and some electrophysiology tests, while the former two were set as the primary outcomes. Subgroup analysis and sensitive analysis were performed and publication bias was evaluated. Heterogeneity among the included studies was examined using the I2 statistic. After selection, 12 studies were identified eligibility for inclusion. Only one study was found to have a high risk of bias. Pooled data of primary outcomes did not show any differences between treatments, and subgroup analysis supported the results. However, patients treated with local corticosteroid injection showed better improvement in distal motor latency (p = 0.002) and compound muscle action potential (p = 0.04). Some studies failed to pass the sensitive analysis, indicating the related analysis might be not so stable. A slight publication bias was observed in subgroup analysis of function scales, among three publication bias test. In conclusion, compared to physical therapy, local corticosteroid injection might have better treatment effects on carpal tunnel syndrome.