Steroid injection or wrist splint for first-time carpal tunnel syndrome?

Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus local corticosteroid injection for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and local corticosteroid injection (LCI) for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), and some studies showed that the effect of ESWT was superior to LCI. We performed this meta-analysis to compare the clinical effects across the two therapies.

METHODS

Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ESWT and LCI for the treatment of CTS were searched in electronic database. The Cochrane risk bias tool was used for quality assessment. After data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies, a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were analyzed. The protocol for this systematic review was registered on INPLASY (202080025) and is available in full on the inplasy.com ( https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2020.8.0025 ) RESULTS: A total of 5 RCT studies with 204 patients were included from the electronic database. The meta-analysis results showed that two therapies were not significantly different in terms of visual analog scale (VAS) score (P = 0.65), Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BQ) score (P = 0.14), sensory distal latency (P = 0.66), and nerve conduction velocity (NCV) of the sensory nerve (P = 0.06). There were significant differences between the results of motor distal latency (P < 0.0001), compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude (P < 0.00001), and sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) amplitude (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of pain relief and function improvement, the effects of ESWT and LCI are not significantly different. In terms of electrophysiological parameters, LCI has a stronger effect on shortening motor distal latency; ESWT is superior to LCI in improving action potential amplitude. ESWT is a noninvasive treatment with fewer complications and greater patient safety. In light of the heterogeneity and limitations, these conclusions require further research for definitive conclusions to be drawn.

Non-Surgical Management and Post-Surgical Rehabilitation of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: An Algorithmic Approach and Practical Guideline

: One of the most common forms of entrapment neuropathy is Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS). There are various treatment options for CTS. However, there are no clear and structured guidelines. This review classified the existing treatments and developed an algorithm to help physicians to choose the best option for their patients. Treatment options were summarized in three sections: non-surgical management of CTS, post-operative management of CTS, and practical open carpal tunnel release post-op protocol. The physicians can prescribe multiple treatment options to CTS patients. Corticosteroid in oral or injectable form has strong evidence in pain control and functional improvement in the short term. Shockwave therapy and nocturnal wrist splints display moderate therapeutic effects. Post carpal tunnel release rehabilitation can be started a few days after the operation.

Conservative or surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome based on the severity and patient risk factors

BACKGROUND

The carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common median nerve compression disease which may result in impaired nerve function. This study was carried out to determine which treatment is more appropriate for moderate or severe CTS patients with or without risk factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a cohort prospective study, the patients with moderate CTS received a conservative treatment including night splint for 3 months, one methyl prednisolone injection whereas patients with severe CTS underwent surgical release. They were followed for 1 year using the bland scale based on the electromyography and nerve conduction velocity studies and five-point global assessment outcome scale.

RESULTS

Totally, 68 moderate CTS cases (32 patients with risk factors and 36 without any risk factors) and 32 cases with severe CTS (16 patients with risk factors and 16 without any risk factors) were assess at 6 months and 1 year following the treatment. Although about 22% of moderate CTS patients with risk factors changed to mild CTS after 6 months of conservative treatment, about 75% showed mild CTS or complete remedy following 1 year (P value < 0.001). This result was about 30% at 6 months and about 95% at 1 year following conservative treatment in patients with moderate CTS without risk factors. None of moderate CTS patients with or without risk factors underwent surgery after 1 year of follow-up. Although almost all patients with severe CTS, with and without risk factors, showed complete recovery or changed to mild CTS at 1 year postoperatively, the result was statistically significant for cases without risk factors (P value = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Conservative treatment for moderate CTS would be a good option, and the final result may be seen 1 year later; however, its positive effect is quicker and better for moderate CTS cases without risk factors. Surgical release of the carpal tunnel may be the best choice not only for severe CTS cases with risk factors but also for cases without risk factors. For obtaining consistent rapid result, it is recommended to do surgical release for all cases of moderate or severe CTS without considering risk factors, but more clinical researches are needed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.