Comparison between single portal endoscopic and 1-cm open carpal tunnel release

Martínez-Catasús, A.; Lobo-Escolar, Luis; García-Bonet, J.; Corrales-Rodríguez, M.; Pasarín-Martínez, A.; Berlanga-de-Mingo, D.

doi:10.1016/j.hansur.2019.02.003

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with the present results, previous studies demonstrated that the satisfaction rates of patients in the ECTR group were higher than those of patients in the OCTR group [24,47,54].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Twenty-five studies [9,24, included complete complication rate data and were included in the pooled analysis of overall complications. There were no significant differences between all complications rates (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.64; P = 0.78; n = 2320; fixed-effects model, with a heterogeneity of I 2 = 16%; P = 0.27) ( Fig.…”

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several meta-analyses have compared various measures of efficacy and safety between ECTR and OCTR [15,[21][22][23]. However, these investigations failed to separate subgroups according to different follow-up times and utilized limited evaluations of patient outcomes; therefore, it is not clear which approach is associated with better clinical results [24,25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Luo

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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: Twenty-eight studies were included in our meta-analysis. 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). There were no significant differences between the two methods in terms of permanent nerve injury (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 than 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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Luo

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Several meta-analyses have compared various measures of efficacy and safety between ECTR and OCTR (14, [20][21][22]. However, these investigations failed to separate subgroups according to different follow-up times and utilized limited evaluations of patient outcomes; therefore, it is not clear which approach is associated with better clinical results (23,24).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Luo

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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. MethodsWe 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 Twenty-eight studies were included in our meta-analysis. 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). There were no significant differences between the two methods in terms of permanent nerve injury (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 than 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.

show abstract

Treatment and Management of Segmental Neuromuscular Disorders

Campbell¹,

Landau²

2022

Neuromuscular Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison between single portal endoscopic and 1-cm open carpal tunnel release

Cited by 12 publications

References 18 publications

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

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

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

Treatment and Management of Segmental Neuromuscular Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About