Comparison of open surgery versus endoscopic-assisted release for gluteal muscle contracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of open surgery and arthroscopic release in gluteal muscle contracture (GMC).

METHODS

Two independent reviewers YM and WL conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science to identify clinical trials that adhered to the PRISMA guidelines (Appendix A), spanning from inception to July 2023. Search items included (("gluteal" OR "gluteus") AND ("contracture" OR "fibrosis")). Research comparing open surgery or arthroscopic release was included. Clinical outcomes were compared using the risk ratio for dichotomous variables and the standardized mean difference for continuous variables. A P value < 0.05 was deemed statistically significant.

RESULTS

Four studies with 453 patients met the selection criteria and were included in this review. Compared with open surgery, in the case of similar postoperative functional satisfaction (1.21, 95% CI = 0.46-3.17, P = 0.70), the arthroscopic release achieved advantages in postoperative complications (3.5, 95% CI = 1.75-7.03, P = 0.0004), cosmetic satisfaction (0.07, 95% CI = 0.01-0.65, P = 0.02), length size (5.65, 95% CI = 4.11-7.19, P < 0.001), and hospitalization duration (1.57, 95% CI = 0.89 to 2.26, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This research shows that both open surgery and arthroscopic release improve functional satisfaction. The arthroscopic release could result in fewer complications, better cosmetic satisfaction, shorter length size, and shorter hospitalization duration. Registration and protocol There is no registration and protocol for this meta-analysis.

Protocol for Endoscopic Versus Open Cubital tunnel release (EVOCU): an open randomized controlled trial : EVOCU trial: Endoscopic Versus Open Cubital tunnel release

BACKGROUND

Cubital tunnel syndrome is the second most common entrapment neuropathy of the upper extremity. Surgical decompression of the ulnar nerve aims to improve complaints and prevent permanent damage to the nerve. Open and endoscopic release of the cubital tunnel are both used in common practice, but none has proven to be superior. This study assesses patient reported outcome and experience measures (PROMs and PREMs respectively), in addition to objective outcomes of both techniques.

METHODS

A prospective single-center open randomized non-inferiority trial will take place at the Plastic Surgery Department in the Jeroen Bosch Hospital, the Netherlands. 160 patients with cubital tunnel syndrome will be included. Patients are allocated to endoscopic or open cubital tunnel release by randomization. The surgeon and patients are not blinded for treatment allocation. The follow-up time will take 18 months.

DISCUSSION

Currently, the choice for one of the methods is based on surgeon's preferences and degree of familiarity with a particular technique. It is assumed that the open technique is easier, faster and cheaper. The endoscopic release, however, has better exposure of the nerve and reduces the chance of damaging the nerve and might decrease scar discomfort. PROMs and PREMs have proven potential to improve the quality of care. Better health care experiences are associated with better clinical outcome in self-reported post-surgical questionnaires. Combining subjective measures with objective outcomes, efficacy, patient treatment experience and safety profile could help differentiating between open and endoscopic cubital tunnel release. This could aid clinicians in evidence based choices towards the best surgical approach in patients with cubital tunnel syndrome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered prospectively with the Dutch Trial Registration under NL9556. Universal Trial Number (WHO-UTN) U1111-1267-3059. Registration date 26-06-2021. The URL: https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/9556.

Update on surgical procedures for carpal tunnel syndrome: What is the current evidence and practice? What are the future research directions?

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a multifactorial compression neuropathy. It is reported to be very common and rising globally. CTS’s treatment varies from conservative measures to surgical treatments. Surgery has shown to be an effective method for more severe cases. However few unclear aspects and room for further research and improvements still remains. We performed a narrative literature review on the most up to date progress and innovation in terms of surgical treatments for CTS. The simple algorithm of leaving the choice of the surgical method to surgeons’ preference and experience (together with consideration of patients’ related factors) seem to be the best available option, which is supported by the most recent metanalysis and systematic reviews. We suggest that surgeons (unless in presence of precise indications towards endoscopic release) should tend to perform a minimally invasive open approach release, favoring the advantage of a better neurovascular structures visualization (and a consequent higher chance to perform a complete release with long term relief of symptoms) instead of favoring an early reduction (in the first postoperative days) of immobilization and pain. Research towards a universally accepted standardization should be aimed for by the researchers, who have failed to date to sufficiently limit bias and limitations.

Open versus arthroscopic release for lateral patellar compression syndrome: a randomized-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Lateral patellar compression syndrome is one of the causes of anterior knee pain in young adults and resulted from tight lateral patellar retinaculum. The aim of our study is to compare between open and arthroscopic release of lateral patellar compression syndrome in relation of functional outcome, time of surgical procedure, length of hospital stays, intraoperative and postoperative complications as bleeding, infection, recurrence, and patellar instability with 2 years of follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

80 patients, age (21-49 years), were divided randomly into 2 groups (A and B). Group A (40 patients) were treated with open release. Group B (40 patients) were treated by arthroscopic release. All these patients are diagnosed as lateral patellar compression syndrome depending on clinical features and MRI. All patients were assessed by Lysholm knee scoring scale before surgery and at periods of 2, 6 weeks, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery.

RESULTS

There is significant difference in functional outcome, measured by Lysholm knee scoring scale, between preoperative and postoperative assessment periods in both groups (P < 0.001). There is significantly better functional outcome at 2 years of follow-up with arthroscopic release (P = 0.018). There is no recurrence in both groups, but there were 4 patients develop medial patellar instability in the group of open release.

CONCLUSION

Both open and arthroscopic lateral release for patients with isolated lateral patellar compression syndrome can be effective surgical procedures, but arthroscopic release can achieve better functional outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT, NCT04130412. Retrospectively registered on 3rd of June, 2020 at ClinicalTrials.gov.

Correction of the Neglected Clubfoot in the Adolescent and Adult Patient

Clubfoot is a complex 4-dimensional deformity involving the hindfoot, midfoot, and forefoot. The fourth dimension is time. Treatment aims at achieving a pain-free, plantigrade, and mobile foot but, over time, flexible deformities become fixed and more difficult to manage. The Ponseti method of serial manipulation and casting can be used successfully in older children and may reduce the need for extensive open surgery. Alternatively, gradual correction of by an external device enables simultaneous correction of all components of the deformity without shortening the foot. Combining gradual soft tissue distraction with open releases and/or bony procedures may achieve a pain-free and plantigrade foot.

Early Patient Satisfaction with Different Treatment Pathways for Trigger Finger and Thumb

Little is known about factors related to patient satisfaction with treatment for trigger digits. This study tested the null hypothesis that there are no factors associated with treatment satisfaction 2 months after completion of treatment (absence of triggering) or 4 months after the last visit for patients with a trigger thumb or finger. Secondary null hypotheses were: 1) There are no factors associated with a change in patients' preferred treatment before and after consultation with a hand surgeon; and 2) Initial treatment provided is not different from final received treatment. In an observational study, 63 English-speaking adult patients were enrolled after being diagnosed with one or more new idiopathic trigger digits by one of two hand surgeons, but before the hand surgeon discussed treatment options. Patients were asked to fill out questionnaires at enrollment. Final evaluation was by phone. Satisfaction with treatment was not related to the initial treatment or other patient or disease factors. Twenty-three patients (37 %) had a different preference for treatment after talking with a hand surgeon. Involvement of the long and ring fingers were the only factors associated with staying with pre-visit treatment preferences. There was a significant difference in proportions of the various treatments provided at enrollment and final treatment recorded at the final phone evaluation, 14 patients (22 %) had a subsequent alternative form of treatment. Patients' preferences for trigger finger treatment often change after consulting with a hand surgeon and during treatment, but these choices do not affect treatment satisfaction.

Risk factors for complications of open trigger finger release

BACKGROUND

Open trigger finger release is generally considered a simple low-risk procedure. Reported complication rates vary widely from 1 to 43 %, mostly based on small studies. Our goal was to determine the incidence of complications in a large consecutive series, while also identifying potential risk factors.

METHODS

All open trigger finger releases performed from 2006 to 2009 by four fellowship-trained hand surgeons at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. There were 795 digits released in 543 patients. Complications were defined as signs or symptoms requiring further treatment and/or considered unresolved by 1 month postoperatively. Complications requiring operative intervention were regarded as major. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine possible risk factors for complications.

RESULTS

There were 95 documented complications among 795 digits (12 %). The most common complications involved persistent pain, stiffness, or swelling, persistent or recurrent triggering, or superficial infection. Most were treated nonoperatively with observation, therapy, steroid injection, or oral antibiotics. There were 19 reoperations (2.4 %), mostly including revision release, tenosynovectomy, and irrigation and debridement. Male gender, sedation, and general anesthesia were independently associated with complications, while age, diabetes, hypothyroidism, recent injection, and concurrent procedures were not associated.

CONCLUSIONS

Open trigger finger release is generally a low-risk procedure, although there is potential for complications, some requiring reoperation. Male gender, sedation, and general anesthesia may be associated with greater risk. Surgeons should be careful to thoroughly discuss the risk of both major and minor complications when counseling patients.

Endoscopic versus open release in patients with de Quervain's tenosynovitis: a randomised trial

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome and complications of endoscopic versus open release for the treatment of de Quervain's tenosynovitis. Patients with this condition were randomised to undergo either endoscopic (n = 27) or open release (n = 25). Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain and Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores were measured at 12 and 24 weeks after surgery. Scar satisfaction was measured using a VAS scale. The mean pain and DASH scores improved significantly at 12 weeks and 24 weeks (p < 0.001) in both groups. The scores were marginally lower in the endoscopic group compared to the open group at 12 weeks (p = 0.012 and p = 0.002, respectively); however, only the DASH score showed a clinically important difference. There were no differences between the groups at 24 weeks. The mean VAS scar satisfaction score was higher in the endoscopic group at 24 weeks (p < 0.001). Transient superficial radial nerve injury occurred in three patients in the endoscopic group compared with nine in the open release group (p = 0.033). We conclude that endoscopic release for de Quervain's tenosynovitis seems to provide earlier improvement after surgery, with fewer superficial radial nerve complications and greater scar satisfaction, when compared with open release.

Transverse anatomic landmarks for the A1 pulley of the thumb

BACKGROUND

Triggering of the thumb is a common entity resulting in pain and disability. Operative management requires accurate knowledge of the pulley system for proper release of the A1 pulley. The purpose of this study was to predict the location of the A1 pulley with surface anatomic landmarks while avoiding injury to the neurovascular bundles and the critical oblique pulley.

METHODS

Thirteen fresh cadaveric thumbs were dissected while the volar digital creases of the thumb served as our potential anatomic landmarks for the A1 pulley. These included the distal crease and the two identifiable proximal creases. Measurements from the proximal edge of the A1 pulley to the surface landmarks were obtained. The pulley system was also inspected for variability, and the length of the A1 pulley was measured.

RESULTS

Of the three volar creases in the thumb, the proximal-proximal crease (PPC) corresponded anatomically to the A1 pulley and demonstrated minimal variability compared to the other landmarks. It measured 0.10 ± 0.15 cm distal to the proximal edge of the A1 pulley. The average length of the thumb A1 pulley measured 0.61 ± 0.17 cm. Therefore, the distal edge of the A1 pulley is predicted to be located 0.51 cm distal to the PPC.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand surface landmarks can be used reliably to predict the location of the thumb A1 pulley, thus avoiding injury to adjacent structures such as the critical oblique pulley.

Does wrist immobilization following open carpal tunnel release improve functional outcome? A literature review

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) is a compressive neuropathy of the median nerve in the carpal tunnel. It is the most common peripheral entrapment neuropathy. The surgical management includes dividing the flexor retinaculum to decompress the median nerve. Post-operative mobilization of the wrist is controversial. Some surgeons splint the wrist for 2-4 weeks whilst others encourage early mobilization. The literature has been inconclusive as to which method is most beneficial. The purpose of this study is to review the literature regarding the effectiveness of wrist immobilization following open carpal tunnel decompression. We reviewed all published clinical trials claiming to evaluate the mobility status following open carpal tunnel release. Studies not in the English language as well as those with small number of patients (n < 30) were excluded. There were five studies that fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in this review. We conclude that there is no beneficial effect from post-operative immobilization after open carpal tunnel decompression when compared to early mobilization.