The comparison of limited-incision versus standard-incision in treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Best-Evidence Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Mini-Open Carpal Tunnel Release

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of mini-open carpal tunnel release (mOCTR) using best-evidence synthesis methods.

Methods

We systematically searched for prospective studies published from January 2013 to July 2023 that reported outcomes from a minimum of 50 mOCTR cases. The outcomes included Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire, Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire Symptom Severity Scale (BCTQ-SSS) and Functional Status Scale (BCTQ-FSS), pain visual analog scale (VAS), complication rate, and reoperation rate. Data analysis was performed using a random-effects meta-analysis, with metaregression to identify the associations between patient- and study-level factors with surgical outcomes.

Results

The meta-analysis included 23 studies with 2,303 patients followed for median durations ranging from 6 to 12 months depending on the outcome. Mini-open carpal tunnel release resulted in statistically significant and clinically important improvements in Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (mean difference = -25.5; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -36.4 to -14.5; P < .001), BCTQ-SSS (mean difference = -2.2; 95% CI: -2.5 to -1.9; P < .001), BCTQ-FSS (mean difference = -2.1; 95% CI: -2.4 to -1.7; P < .001), and pain VAS (mean difference = -5.1; 95% CI: -6.2 to -4.1; P < .001). The sole predictor of improvement in BCTQ-SSS, BCTQ-FSS, and pain VAS was a higher preoperative score for the respective variable (all P < .001). The risk of complications (mainly short-term pillar pain or scar complications) was 8.9% (95% CI: 4.0%-13.8%) and increased with longer incision lengths (P = .008). Revision carpal tunnel release was performed in 0.6% (95% CI: 0.1%-1.0%) of the cases during follow-up. No cases of median nerve transection were reported.

Conclusions

Based on a best-evidence meta-analysis of contemporary studies, mOCTR significantly improved function and pain, with a relatively low risk of mainly temporary complications. Patient outcomes after mOCTR were influenced by patient symptomatology and surgical incision length.

Clinical relevance

Mini-open carpal tunnel release is an effective surgical option that significantly improves symptoms and function, especially for patients with more severe baseline dysfunction. Surgeons should use the shortest incision that allows adequate visualization to safely divide the transverse carpal ligament.

Correlation between Inflammatory Systemic Biomarkers and Surgical Trauma in Elderly Patients with Hip Fractures

The treatment for hip fractures consists of a wide variety of orthopedic implants ranging from prosthesis to intramedullary nails. The purpose of this study is to determine the correlation between blood-count-derived biomarkers such as the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), the monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) and the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) and the level of aggression sustained by elderly patients during these surgical procedures. A total of 129 patients aged over 70 and diagnosed with acute hip fractures who underwent surgical treatment between November 2021 and February 2023 were included in our observational retrospective cohort study. Two groups were formed depending on the anatomic location of the fracture for statistical comparison: group 1 with extracapsular fractures, who received a closed reduction internal fixation (CRIF) with a gamma nail (GN) as treatment, and group 2 with intracapsular fractures, who received a bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) as treatment. The length of hospital stay (LHS), duration of surgery, preoperative days, pre- and postoperative red blood count (RBC) and hemoglobin (HGB) levels and postoperative NLR, PLR and SII were significantly different between the two groups (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the multivariate analysis indicated that the postoperative NLR (p = 0.029), PLR (p = 0.009), SII (p = 0.001) and duration of surgery (p < 0.0001) were independently related to the invasiveness of the procedures. The ROC curve analysis demonstrated that a postoperative SII > 1564.74 is a more reliable predictor of surgical trauma in terms of specificity (58.1%) and sensitivity (56.7%). Postoperative SII as a biomarker appears to be closely correlated with surgical trauma sustained by an older population with hip fractures.

Understanding the Learning Curve of Carpal Tunnel Release With Ultrasound Guidance: A Review

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common compressive neuropathy and can be treated through carpal tunnel release (CTR) if nonoperative treatments fail. CTR can be performed through a variety of techniques, including traditional open, mini-open, endoscopic, and CTR with ultrasound guidance (CTR-US). The evidence on endoscopic CTR is mixed, due to a higher potential for nerve injury with endoscopic CTR compared to traditional open CTR. CTR-US offers the potential advantage of allowing the visualization of all key anatomical structures, combined with a very small incision and minimal soft tissue insult. As with any ultrasonographic technique or procedure, the learning curve needs to be considered for any provider considering adopting CTR-US. However, literature on ultrasound use around the wrist, including early evidence on the learning curve of CTR-US specifically, demonstrates this skill can be learned relatively quickly by providers with a wide range of prior experience in ultrasound and CTR. Overall, there is a need for high-quality studies comparing different CTR techniques, particularly CTR-US, as it offers the potential for considerable cost savings.

Prospective Comparative Analysis Study of Minimally Invasive Surgical Decompressions versus Traditional Surgical Decompression of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Objective: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) occurs when there is compression on the median nerve within the carpal tunnel in the wrist joint. It commonly affects those who make frequent, repetitive hand movements, with women being more affected than men. The present study was aimed at comparing minimally invasive and classical surgical decompression techniques for carpal tunnel syndrome. Materials and Methods: One hundred and four patients with CTS who were scheduled for carpal tunnel decompression were chosen at random. The patients were divided into two groups. Group A had standard classical long incision decompression, whereas Group B had minimally invasive decompression. The patients were evaluated with the Boston Functional Score Scale. Between the two groups, a comparison of visit reports was made at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Results: There was no significant difference in patient age (Group A was 38 years old and Group B was 36 years old) and availability of bilateral CTS status (A was 34 and B was 31). The female-male ratios in groups A and B were 3.6 to 0.2 and 3.1 to 0.3, respectively, with a p-value of p<0.05 indicating significant difference. Comparing both groups, the minimally invasive decompression technique showed a high rate of functional hand grip and a low rate of complications including early wound healing, rapid resumption of palmar strength grip, and rapid return to daily activities. Conclusion: The findings indicate that patients who underwent the minimally invasive surgical decompression one-stitch technique showed significant improvement over the traditional method.

Short incision versus minimally invasive surgery with tool-kit for carpal tunnel syndrome release: a prospective randomized control trial to evaluate the anterior wrist pain and time to return to work or activities

Trial design

The prospective randomized controlled trial.

Background

This 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.

Methods

A 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.

Results

Demographic 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).

Conclusions

There 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 registration

www.clinicaltrials.in.th (TCTR20200530003). Registered 30 May 2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05663-5.

Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common condition greatly affects patients' quality of life and ability to work. Systematic reviews provide useful information for treatment and health decisions.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the methodological quality of previously published systematic reviews on the treatment of CTS.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Overview of systematic reviews conducted at the Brazilian public higher education institution, São Paulo, Brazil.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library database for systematic reviews investigating the treatment of CTS in adults. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR) were applied by two independent examiners.

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies were included. Considering the stratification within the AMSTAR measurement tool, we found that more than 76% of the analyzed studies were "low" or "very low". PRISMA scores were higher when meta-analysis was present (15.61 versus 10.40; P = 0.008), while AMSTAR scores were higher when studies performed meta-analysis (8.43 versus 5.59; P = 0.009) or when they included randomized controlled trials (7.95 versus 6.06; P = 0.043). The intra-observer correlation demonstrated perfect agreement (> 0.8), a Spearman's correlation coefficient of 0.829, and an ICC of0.857. The inter-observer correlation indicated that AMSTAR was more reliable than PRISMA.

CONCLUSION

Overall, systematic reviews of the treatment of CTS are of poor quality. Reviews with better-quality conducted meta-analysis and included randomized controlled trials. AMSTAR is a better tool than PRISMA because it has a better performance and should be recommended in future studies.

REGISTRATION NUMBER IN PROSPERO

CRD42020172328 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172328).

Open versus endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) both have advantages and disadvantages for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). We compared the effectiveness and safety of ECTR and OCTR based on evidence from a high-level randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Medline to identify relevant articles published until August 2019. Data regarding operative time, grip strength, Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire scores, digital sensation, patient satisfaction, key pinch strength, return to work time, and complications were extracted and compared. All mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) were expressed as ECTR relative to OCTR.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis contained twenty-eight studies. ECTR was associated with significantly higher satisfaction rates (MD, 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43 to 4.82; P = 0.0003), greater key pinch strengths (MD, 0.79 kg; 95% CI, 0.27 to 1.32; P = 0.003), earlier return to work times (MD, - 7.25 days; 95% CI, - 14.31 to - 0.19; P = 0.04), higher transient nerve injury rates (OR, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.37 to 17.25; P = 0.01), and a lower incidence of scar-related complications (OR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.59; P = 0.004). The permanent nerve injury showed no significant differences between the two methods (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 0.58 to 6.40; P = 0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that ECTR results in better recovery of daily life functions compared to OCTR, as revealed by higher satisfaction rates, greater key pinch strengths, earlier return to work times, and fewer scar-related complications. Our findings suggest that patients with CTS can be effectively managed with ECTR.