Major neurovascular complications of endoscopic carpal tunnel release

Anatomic Variation of the Hamate Hook as a Potential Risk in Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of anomalies in patients who underwent endoscopic carpal tunnel release and their relationship with clinical outcomes.

Methods

This retrospective study included 65 hands of 57 patients (8 men and 49 women; mean age, 64.9 years) who underwent endoscopic carpal tunnel release for carpal tunnel syndrome at our hospital between March 2016 and April 2022. The patients were diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome based on clinical observations and electrophysiological studies. On T2-weighted magnetic resonance axial images, the height of the hook of the hamate was measured from the bottom to the tip of the hook, and the total height of the hamate was measured from the dorsal surface of the hamate to the tip of the hook. A hook-to-height ratio of less than 0.34 was defined as hypoplastic, and its incidence was investigated. In addition, electrodiagnostic testing of sensory and motor nerve conduction of the median nerve and patient-reported outcome measurements, including Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire, and visual analog scale score, were investigated at 6 months after surgery. Adverse events were collected from patient records.

Results

The mean hook-to-height ratio was 0.40. Hypoplasia with a ratio ≤0.34 was observed in seven hands (10.8%), and adverse events were observed only in the two cases that had a hypoplastic hook of the hamate (3.07%). The patient-reported outcome measurements and the result of electrodiagnostic testing at 6 months after surgery did not correlate with the height of the hook of the hamate.

Conclusions

The incidence of a hypoplastic hook of the hamate is common in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome, and preoperative evaluation of the morphology of the hooks and indications for endoscopic carpal tunnel release in cases of hypoplastic hooks may help predict adverse events.

Type of study/level of evidence

Therapeutic Ⅳ.

Comparison of early clinical outcome in carpal tunnel release - mini-open technique with palmar incision vs. endoscopic technique with wrist crease incision

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine two techniques for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, mini-Open Carpal Tunnel Release (mini-OCTR) and Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release (ECTR), to compare their therapeutic efficacy.

METHODS

Sixteen patients who underwent mini-OCTR in palmar incision and 17 patients who underwent ECTR in the wrist crease incision were included in the study. All patients presented preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively and were assessed with the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH). We also assessed the pain and cosmetic VAS of the entire affected hand or surgical wound, and the patient's satisfaction with the surgery.

RESULTS

In the objective evaluation, both surgical techniques showed improvement at 6 months postoperatively. The DASH score was significantly lower in the ECTR group (average = 3 months: 13.6, 6 months: 11.9) than in the mini-OCTR group (average = 3 months: 27.3, 6 months: 20.6) at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Also, the pain VAS score was significantly lower in the ECTR group (average = 17.1) than in the mini-OCTR group (average = 36.6) at 3 months postoperatively. The cosmetic VAS was significantly lower in the ECTR group (average = 1 month: 15.3, 3 months: 12.2, 6 months: 5.41) than in the mini-OCTR group (average = 1 month: 33.3, 3 months: 31.2, 6 months: 24.8) at all time points postoperatively. Patient satisfaction scores tended to be higher in the ECTR group (average = 3.3) compared to the mini-OCTR group (average = 2.7).

CONCLUSIONS

ECTR in wrist increase incision resulted in better pain and cosmetic recovery in an early postoperative phase compared with mini-OCTR in palmar incision. Our findings suggest that ECTR is an effective technique for patient satisfaction.

A Comparison of Early Complication Rates of Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release With and Without Resident Involvement

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the complication rates of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) relative to orthopedic resident trainee involvement in the procedure.

METHODS

All patients undergoing isolated, elective ECTR by two attending surgeons within a 59-month period were analyzed. Cases were categorized as the following according to the degree of resident involvement: ECTR performed by attending with either no resident or a resident as an assistant (group 1), resident performing a portion of the procedure (group 2), and resident performing the entire procedure (group 3). Early postoperative complications and/or intraoperative conversion to an open procedure were the outcomes of interest. We used a noninferiority design, hypothesizing that resident involvement would not be associated with inferior outcomes compared with cases without resident involvement. Multiple logistic regression models, adjusted for patient demographic and surgical characteristics, were fit to assess the relationship between resident involvement groups and complication/conversion outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 1,167 ECTR cases (895 patients) were performed and returned for postoperative follow-up for at least 2 weeks after surgery. Operative time was significantly shorter for group 1 cases versus group 2 and 3 cases. The early postoperative complication and conversion rates were 1.7% and 1.0%, respectively. Superficial infection (1.2%), deep infection (0.3%), and transient neuropraxia (0.3%) occurred infrequently and did not differ relative to resident involvement. No differences in the odds of complication and/or conversion relative to resident involvement were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of ECTR performed entirely or in part by attending-supervised resident trainees were not inferior to ECTR performed by an attending surgeon regarding the odds of experiencing complications or conversion to an open procedure. With appropriate supervision, ECTR can be performed safely by orthopedic and plastic surgery residents.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic II.

Carpal tunnel syndrome

Median neuropathy at the wrist, commonly referred to as carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), is the most common entrapment neuropathy. It is caused by chronic compression of the median nerve at the wrist within the space-limited carpal tunnel. Risk factors that contribute to the etiology of compression include female gender, obesity, work-related factors, and underlying medical conditions, such as hypothyroidism, pregnancy, and amyloidosis. The diagnosis is made on clinical grounds, although these can be confounded by anatomical variations. Electrodiagnostic studies, which are specific and sensitive in diagnosing CTS, support the diagnosis; however, a subgroup may present with normal results. The advent of imaging techniques, including ultrasound and MRI, further assists the diagnostic process. The management of CTS is divided into the nonsurgical approaches that include hand therapy, splinting and corticosteroid injection, and surgical decompression of the carpal tunnel. Although several surgical techniques have been developed, no one method is more effective than the other. Each of these management approaches are effective at providing symptom relief and are utilized at different severities of the condition. There is, however, a lack of consensus on standardized diagnostic criteria, as well as when and to whom to refer patients for surgery.

Intraoperative Conversion From Endoscopic to Open Carpal Tunnel Release: A Systematic Review and Case Series

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess the incidence, outcomes, and complications associated with conversion from endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) to open carpal tunnel release (OCTR).

METHODS

A retrospective case review of all patients who underwent ECTR over 4 years by 2 fellowship-trained hand surgeons at a single academic center was performed. We recorded outcomes and the reason for conversion in patients who underwent conversion to an OCTR. Baseline demographics and surgical complications were compared between the 2 groups. A systematic review was performed to define the incidence and reasons for conversion from ECTR to OCTR. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we included clinical studies of ECTR from 2000 to 2021.

RESULTS

In the retrospective series, 9 of 892 (1.02%) ECTR cases underwent conversion to an OCTR at the time of the index procedure. One of 9 converted cases had transient neurapraxia involving the recurrent motor branch after surgery compared with 0 cases in the group that underwent ECTR without conversion. Improvements in the visual analog scale for pain and QuickDASH were noted at a mean of 46 weeks after surgery in the group that underwent conversion to OCTR. The systematic review identified an incidence of conversion of 0.62%. The most common reasons for conversion to OCTR in the case series and systematic review were poor visualization due to hypertrophic tenosynovium and aberrant nerve anatomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of intraoperative conversion from ECTR to OCTR during the index procedure was 1.02%, with the most common reasons for conversion being poor visualization due to hypertrophic tenosynovium and aberrant nerve anatomy. Patients who undergo conversion from ECTR to OCTR demonstrate improvements in pain and disability, similar to patients who undergo ECTR without conversion.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Median Nerve and Carpal Tunnel Morphology Before and After Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A 6-Year Follow-up Study

BACKGROUND

Our purpose was to describe structural and morphological features of the median nerve and carpal tunnel on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies obtained before, immediately after, 6 weeks after, and 6 years after endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR).

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, 9 patients with a diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) underwent ECTR. Standardized MRI studies were obtained before ECTR, immediately after ECTR, and 6 weeks and 6 years after surgery. Structural and morphological features of the median nerve and carpal tunnel were measured and assessed for each study with comparisons made between each time point.

RESULTS

All 9 patients had complete symptom resolution postoperatively. On the immediate postoperative MRI, there was a discrete gap in the transverse carpal ligament in all patients. There was retinacular regrowth noted at 6 weeks in all cases. The median nerve cross-sectional area and the anterior-posterior dimension of the carpal tunnel at the level of the hamate increased immediately after surgery and these changes were maintained at 6 years.

CONCLUSIONS

We defined structural and morphological changes on MRI for the median nerve and carpal tunnel in patients with continued symptom resolution 6 years after ECTR. Changes in median nerve and carpal tunnel morphology that occur immediately after surgery remain unchanged at mid-term follow-up in asymptomatic patients. Established imaging criteria for CTS may not apply to postoperative patients. Magnetic resonance imaging appears to be of limited clinical utility in the workup of persistent or recurrent CTS.

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.

Supraretinacular endoscopic carpal tunnel release: A safe alternative method for treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome

PURPOSE

Supraretinacular endoscopic carpal tunnel release (SRECTR) is a technique in which an endoscope is inserted superficial to the flexor retinaculum through a subcutaneous tunnel. The benefits of this method include a clear view for the surgeon and absence of median nerve compression. Surgeons can operate with a familiar view of the flexor retinaculum and median nerve downward, similar to open surgery. This study aimed to investigate the learning curve for SRECTR, an alternate method for carpal tunnel release, and evaluate its complications and the functional outcomes using a disposable commercial kit.

METHODS

We examined the open conversion rates and complications associated with SRECTR in 200 consecutive patients performed by two surgeons. We compared the operative time operated by a single surgeon. We evaluated outcomes in 191 patients according to Kelly's grading system. Patients' mean follow-up period was 12.7 months.

RESULTS

Nine patients required conversion to open surgery. There were no injuries to the nerves and tendons and no hematoma or incomplete dissection of the flexor retinaculum. The operative times varied between 11 and 34 minutes. We obtained the following results based on Kelly's grading of outcomes: excellent in 116, good in 59, fair in 13, and poor in 3 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no patients with neurapraxia, major nerve injury, flexor tendon injury, superficial palmar arch injury, and hematoma. Although there was a learning curve associated with SRECTR, we performed 200 consecutive cases without neurovascular complications. This method may be a safe alternative to minimally invasive carpal tunnel surgery.

Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release Without Invading the Tunnel: A New Transretinacular Technique

Established endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) techniques carry a not entirely eludible risk of iatrogenic complications, mainly because of incomplete view of the cutting blade and intraoperative pressure increase inside the carpal tunnel (CT). We describe a novel single-portal ECTR method, conceived to reduce these risks, by optimizing visual control and avoiding dilatation of the CT. After incising the well exposed proximal third of the transverse carpal ligament (TCL), transection of the remainder is completed using a pediatric urethrotome. This small caliber instrument is moved in the plane of the TCL, without invading the tunnel, and provides detailed view of the TCL and any crossing anatomical structures at any given moment. We present the technique and the results of a retrospective case series of 33 patients with CT syndrome who underwent the procedure, after failing to respond to conservative treatment. Because of improved view and the avoidance of intraoperative pressure trauma to structures passing through the CT, the described approach may contribute to prevent iatrogenic complications and represent a valid improvement over conventional ECTR procedures.

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.

Minimally Invasive Carpal Tunnel Release (CTR) Using the Wongsiri Technique with MiniSURE

INTRODUCTION

The standard open technique for carpal tunnel surgery has wound problems and complications significantly more than minimally invasive surgery using the Wongsiri technique with MiniSURE Kit® (Surgical Innovation Healthcare Co., Ltd, Bangkok, Thailand) and in particular, the open technique surgery requires a longer time for return to work. CTR surgery with endoscopic devices improves the results with fewer wound problems when compared with the commonly used open technique; however, nerve complications and injury are more prevalent with endoscopic surgery than with the open technique. The Wongsiri technique produces good results with new medical devices such as the MiniSURE View, for improved vision and line-of-sight, and the MiniSURE Cut for improved and complete cutting via the supraretinacular technique that may reduce the nerve problems associated with endoscopic tooling in the carpal tunnel.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the results of the operation and postoperative outcomes of the Wongsiri technique with a MiniSURE Kit®.

METHODS

20 patients underwent carpal tunnel release using the Wongsiri technique and a MiniSURE Kit® with a five-step surgery: MIS starts when the surgeon makes a 1.5-1.8 cm incision, creates a working space, inserts the visual tube of MiniSURE View, inserts the freer, and then cuts the transverse carpal ligament by using the MiniSURE Cut.

RESULTS

All 20 successes of the Wongsiri technique and MiniSURE Kit® surgery occurred within 6.8 minutes operative time and a 12 mm wound size. A single outlier, in one case (6.7%), the patient experienced pillar pain which abated within one month. Patients can return to work in 7.3 days.

CONCLUSIONS

The Wongsiri technique with the MiniSURE Kit® demonstrated good outcomes similar to the endoscope. By contrast with the endoscopic surgery, the Wongsiri technique with the MiniSURE Kit® reduced preop, operating, and postop time, many resources, and significant costs and resulted in no nerve problems or complications.

'INSIGHT-PRECISION': a new, mini-invasive technique for the surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome

Objective

To describe a new mini-invasive surgical technique for carpal tunnel release and to present clinical findings associated with using this technique.

Methods

Patients with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome without prior surgical treatment, who underwent a new minimally-invasive surgical technique using a specific surgical tool-kit developed by the author, were included. Prospective data were collected, including preoperative electrodiagnostic testing. The subjective condition of all patients was evaluated pre- and postoperatively with a five-level Likert-type scale (LS) and muscular strength was tested using a JAMAR dynamometer and pinch gauge.

Results

A total of 116 patients (157 hands/cases) underwent surgery performed by the author, and were followed for a mean of 40 months (range, 6 months–7 years). Of these, preoperative electrodiagnostic testing was performed in 112 patients (96.6%). No significant complications were reported. By three months, patients reported that they were satisfied or very satisfied in 147/149 cases (98.7%; LS grade I and II). Strength recovery at three months, based on the average of four measures, was 99.17% (range, 97.43–100.97%).

Conclusions

The described technique is minimally invasive, safe and simple to perform, and provides good results.

Improved Surgical Outcomes With Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release in Patients With Severe Median Neuropathy

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) can be treated with open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) or endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR). Our goal was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ECTR versus OCTR in patients with severe CTS. We hypothesized that ECTR would be as safe and effective as OCTR in these patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with severe CTS who underwent ECTR or OCTR by E. G. Deune between 2001 and 2014. Variables were patient age, sex, relevant medical history, alcohol and tobacco use, and preoperative electromyography and physical examination results. The primary outcome was patient-reported resolution of neuropathic symptoms at last follow-up. Secondary outcomes were surgical complications and need for reoperation. We compared the cohorts using Student's t tests and chi-square tests.

RESULTS

We identified 138 cases of severe CTS in 126 patients who met our inclusion criteria. Thirty-nine cases were treated with ECTR and 99 with OCTR. Mean ages were 59 years (ECTR group) and 56 years (OCTR group). The population was 68% women, and 56% of cases involved the dominant hand. The distributions of age, sex, hand dominance, presence of relevant medical history, and alcohol and tobacco use did not differ significantly between groups. Treatment completely resolved CTS symptoms in 82% of ECTR cases and 39% of OCTR cases. Complication rates (all causes) were similar for both procedures. Recurrence was observed in 2.6% of ECTR cases and 10% of OCTR cases.

CONCLUSIONS

ECTR is a safe and effective alternative to OCTR for patients with severe CTS.

Sonographic monitoring of endoscopic carpal tunnel release

We evaluated the effectiveness of sonographic monitoring of endoscopic carpal tunnel release for the prevention of median nerve or arterial injury and incomplete release of the flexor retinaculum (FR). When the outer tube (OT) was inserted, we used sonography to confirm the relationship of the OT, median nerve, ulnar artery, and superficial palmar arch. Under real-time US monitoring, the OT was lifted up before and after FR release, the so-called lift-up test, to evaluate its mobility under sonography and confirm complete FR release. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 44:597-599, 2016.

Revision Surgery after Carpal Tunnel Release –Analysis of the Pathology in 200 Cases during a 2 Year Period

Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is regarded as a common and successful operative procedure in hand surgery. However, an increasing number of patients with complications have been referred to our hospital. This retrospective investigation was undertaken to clarify the reasons for persisting or recurrent symptoms in 200 patients who underwent secondary exploration during a 26 month period at a single institution. In 108 cases, the flexor retinaculum was found to have been released incompletely. In 12 patients, a nerve laceration had occurred during the primary intervention. In 46 patients, symptoms were due to the nerve being tethered in scar tissue. The re-exploration revealed circumferential fibrosis around and within the median nerve in 17 patients and a tumour in the carpal tunnel in four patients. In 13 patients, no specific reason was found for recurrence of symptoms. We conclude that CTR seems to be a widely underestimated procedure and revision surgery could be largely avoided by reducing technical errors during the primary operation.

Similar effectiveness of the open versus endoscopic technique for carpal tunnel syndrome: a prospective randomized trial

This prospective randomized study aims at evaluating the electrophysiological results of endoscopic and open carpal ligament release in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. Included in the study were 41 patients diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome (21 hands in the endoscopic group and 20 hands in the open group). The Boston questionnaire was administered preoperatively and postoperatively to the patients, and their functional capacities and symptom severities were recorded. Physical examination was carried out preoperatively and in the postoperative sixth month. Demographic data and preoperative Boston symptomatic and functional scores were similar between both groups. A significant improvement was obtained in the Boston symptomatic and functional scores of both groups, but no significant difference was found between the groups in terms of improvement in the symptomatic and the functional scores. A significant shortening in median nerve motor distal latency and an increase in the velocity of sensory conductions were determined in both groups in the postoperative electromyography, but no difference was found between them in terms of improvement in the electromyography values. It was shown both clinically and electrophysiologically that endoscopic carpal tunnel surgery was as effective as open surgery as a treatment method for carpal tunnel syndrome.

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

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome is a common compressive neuropathy of the median nerve. The efficacy and safety of endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release remain controversial.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purpose of this study was to determine whether endoscopic compared with open carpal tunnel release provides better symptom relief, validated outcome scores, short- and long-term strength, and/or digital sensibility; entails a differential risk of complications such as nerve injury, scar tenderness, pillar pain, and reoperation; allows an earlier return to work; and takes less operative time.

METHODS

The English-language literature was searched using MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials that compared endoscopic and open carpal tunnel release were included in the meta-analysis. Methodologic quality was assessed with the Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist, and a sensitivity analysis was performed. Symptom relief, Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) scores, strength, digital sensibility, complications, reoperation, interval to return to work, and operative time were analyzed. Twenty-one randomized controlled trials containing 1859 hands were included.

RESULTS

Endoscopically treated patients showed similar symptom relief and BCTQ scores; better early recovery of grip strength (mean difference [MD], 3.03 kg [0.08-5.98]; p = 0.04) and pinch strength (MD, 0.77 kg [0.33-1.22]; p < 0.001) but no advantage after 6 months; lower risk of scar tenderness (risk ratio [RR], 0.53 [0.35-0.82]; p = 0.005); higher risk of nerve injury (RR, 2.84 [1.08-7.46]; p = 0.03), most of which were transient neurapraxias. Similar risk of pillar pain and reoperation; an earlier return to work (MD, -8.73 days [-12.82 to -4.65]; p < 0.001); and reduced operative time (MD, -4.81 minutes [-9.23 to -0.39]; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

High-level evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that endoscopic release allows earlier return to work and improved strength during the early postoperative period. Results at 6 months or later are similar according to current data except that patients undergoing endoscopic release are at greater risk of nerve injury and lower risk of scar tenderness compared with open release. While endoscopic release may appeal to patients who require an early return to work and activities, surgeons should be cognizant of its elevated incidence of transient nerve injury amid its similar overall efficacy to open carpal tunnel release. Additional research is required to define the learning curve of endoscopic release and clarify the influence of surgeon volume on its safety.

Endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release for idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The objective of this study is to do a meta-analysis of the literature and compare the safety and efficacy of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR) for idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). A comprehensive literature search of the electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register was undertaken for randomized studies reporting carpal tunnel syndrome treated with ECTR or OCTR. The quality of randomized trials was critically assessed. Pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for safety and efficacy outcome variables were calculated by fixed-effect or random-effect methods with RevMan v.5.1 provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. A total of 13 randomized trials were included by total retrieve and riddling. The results of our meta-analysis showed no significant difference in the overall complication rate (RR = 1.34, 95% CI [0.74, 2.43], P = 0.34), subjective satisfaction (RR = 1.0, 95% CI [0.93, 1.08], P = 0.92), time to return to work (mean difference = −3.52 [−8.15, 1.10], P = 0.14), hand grip and pinch strength, and the operative time (mean difference = −1.89, 95% CI [−5.84, 2.06]) between patients in the ECTR and OCTR groups (P = 0.16, 0.70, and 0.35, respectively). The rate of hand pain (RR = 0.73, 95% CI [0.53, 0.93], P = 0.02) in the ECTR group was significantly lower than that in the OCTR group. ECTR treatment seemed to cause more reversible postoperative nerve injuries as compared with OCTR (RR = 2.38, 95% CI [0.98, 5.77], P = 0.05). Although ECTR significantly reduced postoperative hand pain, it increased the possibility of reversible postoperative nerve injury in patients with idiopathic CTS. No statistical difference in the overall complication rate, subjective satisfaction, the time to return to work, postoperative grip and pinch strength, and operative time was observed between the two groups of patients.

Symptoms During or Shortly After Isolated Carpal Tunnel Release and Problems Within 24 hours After Surgery

This study used the National Survey of Ambulatory Surgery (NSAS) database to measure the incidence of and risk factors for symptoms in the ambulatory surgery center and problems within 24 h after isolated carpal tunnel release (CTR). The NSAS contained records on 400,000 adult patients with carpal tunnel syndrome who were treated with CTR in 2006, based on ICD-9 codes. The type of anesthesia used and factors associated with symptoms and problems were sought in bivariate and multivariable statistical analyses. The mean duration of the procedure was 16 ± 8.8 min. Only 5 % were performed under local anesthesia without sedation, 45 % with IV sedation, 28 % regional anesthesia, and 19 % general anesthesia. Symptoms in the ambulatory surgery center or a problem within 24 h after discharge were recorded in 10 % of patients, all of them minor and transient, including difficulties with pain and its treatment. The strongest risk factors were male sex, age of 45 years and older, and participation of an anesthesiologist. Local anesthesia and regional anesthesia were associated with more perioperative symptoms and postoperative problems. Most CTR are performed with some sedation in the United States. CTR is a safe procedure: one in 10 patients will experience a minor issue in the perioperative or immediate postoperative period.

Early major complications of endoscopic carpal tunnel release: A review of 1200 cases

Although the early benefits of endoscopic carpal tunnel release have been demonstrated, there is great controversy regarding the risks and safety of the technique. The present study reports early major complications in a series of 1278 consecutive cases performed by a single surgeon over a seven-year period. All procedures were performed under local anaesthesia on an outpatient basis using the Agee single portal technique. Mean follow-up was three months. No vascular, tendon or permanent nerve injuries were documented. Recurrent or persistent symptoms occurred in 7% of patients for which 20 of 89 underwent subsequent open carpal tunnel release. No nerve injuries were found on re-exploration. Other complications were consistent with previously reported incidences. This is the largest reported case series by a single surgeon and represents an accumulation of surgical experience at the upper end of the learning curve. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release is a safe procedure in this experienced single surgeon series.

Anatomical landmarks for safer carpal tunnel decompression: an experimental cadaveric study

BACKGROUND

Carpal tunnel syndrome is a common presentation to surgical outpatient clinics. Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome involves surgical division of the flexor retinaculum. Palmar and recurrent branches of the median nerve as well as the superficial palmar arch are at risk of damage.

METHODOLOGY

Thirteen cadavers of Sri Lankan nationality were selected. Cadavers with deformed or damaged hands were excluded. All selected cadavers were preserved with the conventional arterial method using formalin as the main preservative. Both hands of the cadavers were placed in the anatomical position and dissected carefully. We took pre- determined measurements using a vernier caliper. We hypothesized that the structures at risk during carpal tunnel decompression such as recurrent branch of the median nerve and superficial palmar arch can be protected if simple anatomical landmarks are identified. We also hypothesized that an avascular area exists in the flexor retinaculum, identification of which facilitates safe dissection with minimal intra operative bleeding. Therefore we attempted to characterize the anatomical extent of such an avascular area as well as anatomical landmarks for a safer carpal tunnel decompression.Ethical clearance was obtained for the study.

RESULTS

In a majority of specimens the recurrent branch was a single trunk (n =20, 76.9%). Similarly 84.6% (n = 22) were extra ligamentous in location. Mean distance from the distal border of the TCL to the recurrent branch was 7.75 mm. Mean distance from the distal border of TCL to the superficial palmar arch was 11.48 mm. Mean length of the flexor retinaculum, as measured along the incision, was 27.00 mm. Mean proximal and distal width of the avascular area on TCL was 11.10 mm and 7.09 mm respectively.

CONCLUSION

We recommend incision along the radial border of the extended ring finger for carpal tunnel decompression. Extending the incision more than 8.16 mm proximally and 7.75 mm distally from the corresponding borders of the TCL should be avoided. Incision should be kept to a mean length of 27.0 mm, which corresponds to the length of TCL along the above axis. We also propose an avascular area along the TCL, identification of which minimizes blood loss.

Evaluation and treatment of failed carpal tunnel release

Treatment failure and complications are encountered in 1% to 25% of all carpal tunnel releases. Besides hematoma, infection, skin necrosis, and intraoperative iatrogenic injuries, persistence and recurrence should be included in this discussion. Persistence is often related to incomplete release. Similar symptoms recurring after a symptom-free interval of 6 months are considered recurrent and may be caused by intraneural or perineural scarring. Adequate diagnosis and treatment of these failures can be challenging. Operative release is the main treatment consisting of complete decompression of the median nerve. In some circumstances, coverage of the median nerve may be necessary.

CARPAL TUNNEL RELEASE WITH A LIMITED PALMAR INCISION: CLINICAL RESULTS AND PILLAR PAIN AT 18 MONTHS FOLLOW-UP

Limited open carpal tunnel release was performed in 58 hands (44 patients) using a single 1.5 cm palmar incision according to the technique described by Lee and Strickland.1The patients were assessed at regular intervals after surgery for hand functions and subjective symptoms, in particular pillar pain. There was rapid wound recovery with minimal post-operative pain and scarring, and return to functional activities within four weeks. At an average follow-up of 18 months (range 14–24 months), 91% of patients had complete or significant resolution of hand paraesthesia. No patient required further surgery. However, pillar pain was found in 48% of hands at four weeks, 21% at 12 weeks, 12% at six months, 9% at 12 months and 7% at the last follow-up. The significance of the incidence of pillar pain is discussed.

ENDOSCOPIC CARPAL TUNNEL RELEASE AND CONGENITAL ANOMALIES OF THE MEDIAN NERVE

Endoscopic release has been shown to be a safe and effective means of carpal tunnel decompression. The surgeon needs to be aware of the variations in the anatomy of the median nerve in order to minimise the risk of nerve injury. In this series of 748 endoscopic carpal tunnel releases, six were found to have variations in the median nerve anatomy, in two patients conversion to open release was necessary.

Is carpal tunnel release under-utilized in veterans with spinal cord injury?

OBJECTIVE

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common disorder among individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). Although carpal tunnel release is highly effective, the procedure may be under-utilized in this population. This study attempts to identify if CTS is under-treated in Veterans with SCI.

DESIGN

The Veterans Affairs (VA) National Patient Care Database was used for data compilation within fiscal years 2007 and 2008. Using ICD-9-CM diagnoses codes, individuals with SCIs were identified, including those diagnosed with CTS. Current procedural terminology (CPT) codes further showed those who had undergone surgical intervention including open and endoscopic release of the transverse carpal ligament. The VA SCI cohort was compared to the general VA population with regard to demographics, diagnosis, surgical intervention, and treatment location.

RESULTS

A total of 19 296 veterans with SCI were identified within the 2-year period. The prevalence of CTS within this cohort was 3.5%, compared to 2.1% in the general VA population. The rate of transverse carpal ligament release was similar between the VA SCI cohort and general population (0.24 and 0.17%, respectively). The majority of surgical treatment (89%) occurred within the VA 'hub-and-spoke' system of SCI care.

CONCLUSION

CTS appears to be under-diagnosed and under-treated in veterans with SCI.

Flexor retinaculum division: does it contribute to the success of carpal tunnel release?

Yuval Krieger, Avia Moses, Eldad Silberstein, Shimon Weitzman, Naftali Liberman, Amiram Sagi

Aims: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common entrapment neuropathy. Open decompression of the median nerve is considered the standard surgical treatment for CTS. This article describes a study to assess and compare the clinical efficacy of operative treatment performed by transverse carpal ligament release alone (limited carpel tunnel release (CTR)), to that achieved after transverse carpal ligament release with additional division of the proximal portion of the flexor retinaculum (extended CTR) which is continuous with the deep investing fascia of the forearm.

Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed by telephone interview, using a modified Levine scale to assess symptoms and functional impairment 4–7 years post-operatively in two patient groups who were operated using two different techniques, over a two year period. One group (N = 73) had open CTR by limited transverse carpal ligament division alone, performed by one hand surgeon; the second group (N = 83) had open CTR by division of the transverse carpal ligament and the proximal portion of the flexor retinaculum, performed by another hand surgeon.

Findings: Pre-operatively the two groups were similar, both in terms of patient characteristics and of disease severity. Both groups improved significantly. No clinical difference was demonstrated in terms of symptom relief, recurrence or complication rate.

Conclusions: This study suggests that adjunctive division of the proximal portion of the flexor retinaculum, although safe, offers no advantage over division of the transverse carpal ligament alone in standard open carpal tunnel release.

Results of endoscopic carpal tunnel release relative to surgeon experience with the Agee technique

PURPOSE

To establish the rate of iatrogenic injury after endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) for a surgeon in the first 2 years of practice; to report the rate of conversion from ECTR to open carpal tunnel release (OCTR), the reason for conversion, and any increase in morbidity found in patients converted to OCTR; and to determine whether the conversion rate decreased with increasing surgeon experience.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing ECTR by a single surgeon in the first 2 years of practice. Data collected or calculated included symptom relief, rate of conversion to OCTR, reason for conversion, and neurovascular complications. For patients converted to OCTR, we assessed satisfaction and function using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire. We compared these results for 1 to 6 months, 7 to 12 months, and 12 to 24 months to determine whether a learning curve was present.

RESULTS

A total of 278 patients (358 procedures) underwent ECTR. Of these, 12 patients required conversion to OCTR during the index procedure over a 2-year period. In the first 6 months of practice, 8 of 71 ECTRs were converted to OCTR compared to 1 of 72 in the second 6 months. This was a statistically significant decrease (p = .017). In year 2, 3 of 215 patients were converted to OCTR. Average Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score for patients converted from ECTR to OCTR was 9. No patients required repeat surgery for recurrence of carpal tunnel symptoms. We observed no major neurovascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS

A learning curve for ECTR was present. Rates of conversion significantly diminished with increased surgeon and anesthesia experience. Patients requiring conversion showed no variation in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores from established values after OCTR. Patients may be at a higher risk of conversion to OCTR during the learning curve time period; nevertheless, we found no increased morbidity.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic III.

[Pseudoaneurysm of the superficial palmar arch, following endoscopic carpal tunnel release. A case report]

Pseudo-aneurysm of the superficial palmar arch following carpal tunnel release is exceptional and thus poorly reported. We present one observation, recorded on more than 1300 hands treated by endoscopic release using the "Chow" technique by a single surgeon. Ultra-sonography could be used in an attempt to locate the superficial palmar arch and thus prevent vascular damage at surgery.

Optimal management of carpal tunnel syndrome

In order to improve health care efficiency and effectiveness, treatments should provide disease improvement or resolution at a reasonable cost. The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) published a guideline for treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in 2009 based on review of the literature up to April 6, 2007. We have now reviewed the material published since then. Through reviewing evidence-based articles published during this period, this paper examines the current options and trends for treating CTS. We performed a systematic review of the randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines to present the outcomes of current treatments for this disease. Twenty-five studies met our inclusion criteria. Thirteen randomized, controlled trials and 12 systematic reviews, including three Cochrane database systematic reviews, were retrieved. Our review revealed that most of the recent studies support the AAOS guideline. However, the recent literature demonstrates a trend towards recommending early surgery for CTS cases with or without median nerve denervation, although the AAOS guideline recommends early surgical treatment only for cases with denervation. The usefulness of splinting and steroids as initial treatments for improving patients’ symptoms are also supported by the recent literature, but these effects are temporary. The evidence level for ultrasound treatment is still low, and further studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of this treatment. Finally, our review revealed a paucity of articles comparing the costs of CTS diagnosis and treatment. With the recent focus on health care reform and rising costs, attention to the direct and indirect costs of health care is important for all conditions. Future well designed studies should include cost analyses to help determine the cost burden of CTS.

Single portal endoscopic carpal tunnel release: modification of Menon's technique and data from 65 cases

The purpose of our study is to make a follow-up evaluation of endoscopic carpal tunnel release under focal anesthesia using the Wolf single portal system. A total of 65 patients with a mean age of 50 years undergoing 79 procedures were retrospectively studied. Preoperative complaints, intraoperative findings, and postoperative results of all the patients were recorded. Follow-up was conducted at 1, 5, 12, and 24 weeks and at 1 year postoperatively. Wound pain, analysis of satisfaction, Levine functional status scales, and surgical complications were included. No patients sustained iatrogenic neurovascular injury or hematoma formation. The average Levine functional severity score decreased from 2.82 points preoperatively to 1.2 points at the most recent survey. One case recurred at 1 year after the surgery and subsequently underwent open release. Surgery using the Wolf single portal system under focal anesthesia is a safe and efficacious option for endoscopic carpal tunnel release.

Double- versus single-incision technique for open carpal tunnel release

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial was performed comparing the double incision technique to the conventional open method used in carpal tunnel decompression surgery, with pillar pain, scar sensitivity, and recovery of grip strength each assessed independently. Forty patients (40 hands) were operated on, 21 hands with the standard single-incision technique and 19 hands with the double-incision technique. Patients were assessed throughout 6 months of follow-up. The results showed that the double-incision technique caused less pillar pain and scar sensitivity compared to the single-incision technique. No difference in recovery of grip strength was noted between the 2 techniques. The limited open technique using the double incision in carpal tunnel decompression surgery is advantageous over the standard technique in tackling scar-related morbidities.

Mini open carpal tunnel release using Knifelight: evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of using a single wrist incision (cadaveric study)

This cadaveric study evaluates the margin of safety and technical efficacy of mini open carpal tunnel release performed using Knifelight (Stryker Instruments) through a transverse 1 cm wrist incision. A single investigator released 32 wrists in 17 cadavers. The wrists were then explored to assess the completeness of release and damage to vital structures including the superficial palmar arch, palmar cutaneous branch and recurrent branch of the median nerve. All the releases were complete and no injury to the median nerve and other structures were observed. The mean distance of the recurrent motor branch to the ligamentous divisions was 5.7 +/- 2.4 mm, superficial palmar arch was 8.7 +/- 3.1 mm and palmar cutaneous branch to the ligamentous division was 7.2 +/- 2.4 mm. The mean length of the transverse carpal ligament was 29.3 +/- 3.7 mm. Guyon's canal was preserved in all cases.

13-year experience of carpal tunnel release using the Indiana Tome technique

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the reliability and morbidity rate of carpal tunnel release with the Indiana Tome technique via a small palmar incision when used by experienced hand surgeons.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of 1332 carpal tunnel releases using the Indiana Tome performed by 2 fellowship-trained hand surgeons at university hospitals from July 1993 to August 2006. Chart review focused on complications with this technique.

RESULTS

All patients returned to preoperative activities, in employment or otherwise. Nonmanual laborers resumed regular job tasks between 2 days and 3 weeks. The 2 surgeons experienced 11 complications in 1332 cases, for an overall complication rate of 0.83%. The most common complication, in 8 cases, was numbness and hypersensitivity in the third common digital nerve distribution; 2 of these 8 patients had normal 2-point discrimination and the other 6 had persistently 2-point discrimination greater than 10 mm despite resolution of preoperative paresthesia symptoms. In the latter group, 3 patients had repeat exploration, with findings of fascicular injury and scarring in 2 patients and normal nerve in the third (who ultimately had normalized 2-point discrimination by 6 weeks after surgery). The 3 patients without re-exploration had their 2-point discrimination returned to normal by 11 months after surgery. Ultimately, only 2 patients (0.15%) had persistently increased 2-point discrimination. The remaining complications (3 cases) were transient neuropraxia of the entire median nerve (1 patient), an incomplete release (1 patient) requiring repeat surgery, and a recurrence of carpal tunnel syndrome (1 patient) with perineural scar noted at 8 months after surgery, treated successfully with a hypothenar fat pad flap.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest retrospective review of the Indiana Tome technique to date. This technique can be used by experienced hand surgeons and offers early resumption of preoperative activities and a low complication rate. The most common complication was neurapraxia in the third common digital nerve distribution. The overall complication rate was 0.83% (11 in 1332).

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Median nerve mistaken for palmaris longus tendon: restoration of function with sensory nerve transfers

Intraoperative iatrogenic nerve injuries occur despite vigilance in the operating room. Most of these injuries occur as a result of patient positioning, traction or pressure injury, hematoma, or technical error. The median nerve is especially susceptible to injury during carpal tunnel release. A rare but devastating injury of the median nerve is complete transection. The number of devastating injuries is not well known, as few of the injuries are documented or publicized. We report a case where the median nerve was harvested instead of the palmaris longus tendon. We present a review of the literature and suggest an alternative treatment to median nerve grafting using sensory nerve transfers in the hand.

Complications of endoscopic and open carpal tunnel release

PURPOSE

To compile the major complications of carpal tunnel surgery and compare reported complications for open and endoscopic techniques.

METHODS

A literature assessment was performed for published complications of open and endoscopic carpal tunnel release procedures; 80 publications, representing a period from 1966 through 2001, were reviewed. Complications were identified as neurapraxia; nerve, tendon, or artery injury; and wound infection or dehiscence that required antibiotics or additional operative care. Differences in the proportions of complications between carpal tunnel release procedures were explored with the use of Fisher exact tests.

RESULTS

The literature review yielded 22,327 cases of endoscopic carpal tunnel release and 5,669 cases of open carpal tunnel release. For structural damage to nerves, arteries, or tendons, the incidence for open carpal tunnel release is 0.49% and for endoscopic methods (transbursal and extra-bursal), 0.19%. This difference is statistically significant (P < .005; 2-tailed Fisher exact test) and suggests that the overall proportion of structural complications for open carpal tunnel release according to our complication selection criteria is greater than the overall proportion of complications for endoscopic carpal tunnel release.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of complications for carpal tunnel release, performed through an endoscopic or open approach, is very low. Selection of an open versus an endoscopic approach on the basis of structural complications for nerve, arteries, or tendons is not supported by statistical analysis of published complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic study.

Intra-individual comparison between openand 2-portal endoscopic release in clinically matched bilateral carpal syndrome

Based upon bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) we undertook a prospective randomised intra-individual comparison between open (OR) and 2-portal endoscopic release (2-PER) to establish if there is any demonstrable advantage in undertaking either technique in a 1 year follow-up. Ten patients with bilateral CTS were enrolled in this study and underwent a 2-PER on the one and an OR with two minimised incisions on the contralateral hand. Both hands were examined pre- and postoperatively after 2, 4, 6 and 12 weeks and after 6 and 12 months, respectively. Preoperatively both hands revealed statistically no significant differences in all the parameters recorded. Comparing both techniques no significant differences could be detected in the follow-up period. Nevertheless, both techniques showed significant improvements in the severity of symptoms and pain, in sensory nerve testing and in electro-diagnostic parameters, when comparing pre- with postoperative data after 1 year. The endoscopic approach revealed no distinct advantages over the open technique not only in the late but also in the early postoperative follow-up period when performing intra-individual comparison. Considering the higher complication rate and costs when performing 2-PER the OR with two minimised incisions seems to be a good alternative in order to keep the recovery period as short as possible.

Carpal tunnel release through a small incision using a special knife guide

There have been controversial opinions regarding whether the release of the carpal tunnel should be performed arthroscopically or through an open incision. The authors present a method of open release through a small incision using a set of specially designed instruments, retaining advantages of observing the pathology under direct vision and avoiding complications of hazardous injuries to important structures. The instruments consist of a thin metal guide with a groove in the center to accommodate an angled knife holder. The procedure has been performed since 1997 with no complications.

Endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a review of 753 cases in 486 patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic carpal tunnel release is gaining increasing acceptance relative to the standard open carpal tunnel release for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Concerns about endoscopic carpal tunnel release include effectiveness of therapy and complication rates. This study attempted to evaluate outcomes of endoscopic carpal tunnel release in a large patient cohort.

METHODS

Four hundred eighty-six patients (753 hands) with carpal tunnel syndrome who underwent endoscopic carpal tunnel release by a single surgeon were reviewed retrospectively. Data included demographics, subjective complaints, prior interventions, preoperative examination findings, and postoperative follow-up. All follow-up data were obtained from a single, independent, occupational therapy clinic.

RESULTS

Median patient age was 48 years. Three hundred seventy-seven patients were gainfully employed at presentation, and 206 filed a worker's compensation claim. Median symptom duration was 2 years. Nonoperative therapy was ineffective in 151 patients. Preoperative nerve conduction studies were consistent with carpal tunnel syndrome in 472 patients (97 percent); all patients had either physical examination findings or nerve conduction studies consistent with carpal tunnel syndrome. Four hundred eighty-six patients (100 percent) obtained symptom relief. Complications included one transient median nerve neurapraxia, six complaints of residual pain, and one complaint of hypersensitivity. Worker's compensation patients and non-worker's compensation patients returned to work full-duty at similar times postoperatively. Ninety percent of employed patients returned to their original occupation.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' data indicate that an endoscopic approach for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome is safe and effective. Patients demonstrated a high return-to-work rate and an extremely low complication rate. The data challenge the belief that endoscopic carpal tunnel release results in higher complication rates.

Complex surgical conditions of the hand: avoiding the pitfalls

Many factors can contribute to a successful result in hand surgery, as is the case in all orthopaedic surgery. An accurate diagnosis with emphasis on a complete history coupled with a detailed physical examination supplemented with the appropriate ancillary studies and proper preoperative surgical planning all are necessary in reaching this goal. An improper diagnosis such as in suspected carpal tunnel syndrome can result in continued symptoms. We will emphasize some of the more complex and difficult conditions in hand surgery that necessitate a high level of clinical acumen. It is hoped that by highlighting these details we may help others avoid common pitfalls and help to achieve an excellent result and avoid litigation. Although these are not the only problems involved in hand surgery, they are complex and can be missed easily.

Iatrogene Nervenverletzungen

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the causes of failed endoscopic carpal tunnel release (CTR) in order to detect potentially hazardous operative steps. The intraoperative findings of 10 microsurgically revised cases were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

From January 1999 to October 2001, ten patients underwent open revision surgery after being referred because of failed endoscopic carpal tunnel release (CTR). The median nerve had been injured in five cases, necessitating autologous sural nerve grafting in four. Two other patients underwent extensive (external and internal) neurolysis. The lesions were located twice in the main nerve trunk, three times in the recurrent motor branch, three times in a digital nerve, and once in the sensory palmar branch. The transverse carpal ligament (TCL) had not been sectioned in four cases and was incomplete in two. In another two cases, previously sectioned TCLs were closed again by firm fibrous tissue. In three cases, postoperative hematomas after the initial release were described and possibly contributed to symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic CTR in the hand of the inexperienced bears major risks for iatrogenic neurovascular injury.

Endoscopic carpal tunnel release: thirteen years' experience with the Chow technique

The purpose of this single-center study was to evaluate the results of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) by using the dual portal Chow technique in a large series of patients. A total of 2,675 procedures in 1,886 patients were performed during a 13-year period. Follow-up evaluation was performed in 2,402 (90%) cases or 1,698 (90%) patients. The success rate was 95% and the recurrence rate was 0.5%. A total of 106 cases (4.5%) were considered failures or had unsatisfactory results. The overall complication rate was 1.1% but no serious complications occurred in this series. The return-to-work status was followed-up in 1,156 patients; 90% of non-worker's compensation patients and 60% of worker's compensation patients returned to work within 4 weeks. This study suggests that ECTR for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTR) is a reliable procedure with a high success rate. Based on our 13 years of experience, we believe that the technique is safe and iatrogenic complications can be avoided with meticulous surgical technique.

Surgical release of the carpal tunnel

A thorough understanding of the normal anatomy and possible anomalies that may exist is important for the surgeon managing median nerve compression at the wrist. Given the high incidence of anatomic variability occurring in and around the carpal canal, open decompression of the median nerve is the preferred surgical technique for treating carpal tunnel syndrome. This approach provides complete visualization of the region, enabling the surgeon to decompress the nerve thoroughly, identify and treat anatomic abnormalities, and protect important neurovascular structures. Open carpal tunnel release is a safe and reliable operation with a high rate of functional improvement and patient satisfaction.

Carpal tunnel release via limited palmar incision

The limited incision carpal tunnel release provides an effective, reliable, and safe method for decompression of the median nerve at the wrist. The technique described above minimizes risk of complication through the design of the instruments and conceptual approach to the anatomy and surgical exposure. This method combines the reduced postoperative pain and quicker recovery of the ECTR technique with the safety and lower operative expense of the conventional open technique.