Surgery for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome: Endoscopic and open release compared in 10 patients

Futami, Toshiro

doi:10.3109/17453679508995510

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the ineligible studies, 11 were excluded because they were not randomized (23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33), four because they did not compare ECTR with OCTR (34-37) and two because RTW was not an outcome measure (38)(39).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Reporting Return to Work in Studies Comparing Open with Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Ayeni

Thoma

Haines

et al. 2005

Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND:In studies comparing open with endoscopic carpal tunnel release, return to work (RTW) is often cited as a primary outcome. OBJECTIVE: The present study assessed the reporting of RTW and evaluated its usefulness in studies comparing these two methods of carpal tunnel release. METHODS: A computerized search was conducted to find randomized controlled trials that compared open with endoscopic carpal tunnel release, with RTW as an outcome measure. The factors that were compared across the studies included definition of RTW, units quantifying RTW, measures of hand function, patients' type of employment, worker's compensation or insurance status, patients' handedness, unilateral or bilateral carpal tunnel release, and use of rehabilitation. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria for the present systematic review. Of the 15 studies reviewed, there were seven definitions of RTW. All studies defined whether the patients underwent unilateral or bilateral carpal tunnel release but there was variability in the calculation of RTW when bilateral releases were performed. The impact of worker's compensation or insurance, type of work, handedness and rehabilitation were inconsistently addressed as factors affecting RTW. CONCLUSIONS: Although RTW ideally reflects function and recovery, it is inadequately measured and reported. The present review revealed that, in studies comparing open carpal tunnel release with endoscopic carpal tunnel release, there is lack of uniformity in reporting RTW, which may contribute to the inconclusive results for RTW. Future research needs to ensure that RTW is used in a consistent manner.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Reporting Return to Work in Studies Comparing Open with Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Ayeni

Thoma

Haines

et al. 2005

Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 The treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome is primarily surgical, with endoscopic carpal Volume 118, Number 1 • Carpal Tunnel Release tunnel release proving to have better patient satisfaction than open release and earlier return of function with minimal discomfort. 12,13 In the current study, patients choosing simultaneous surgery showed no statistically significant differences when compared with the staged groups in terms of postoperative improvement, satisfaction rate, and postoperative complications. Previous reports had similar findings, although these reports were retrospective or included only open releases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Staged versus Simultaneous Bilateral Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: An Outcome Study

Nesbitt

Innis

Dubin

et al. 2006

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No difference was found in sensory or motor testing in the pre-and postoperative period between treatment groups. Futami [24] reported on 10 patients who had bilateral CTS and who underwent OCTR in one hand and ECTR surgery in the other hand. No postoperative differences were found in resolution of symptoms or in postoperative grip strength between the groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a critical review

Jimenez

Gibbs

Clapper

1997

FOC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An extensive review of published articles on the subject of endoscopic carpal tunnel release surgery is presented, encompassing six endoscopic techniques used to treat carpal tunnel syndrome. Since the first report in 1987, 7091 patients have undergone 8068 operations. The overall success rate has been 96.52%, with a complication rate of 2.67% and a failure rate of 2.61%. The mean time to return to work in patients not receiving Workers' Compensation was 17.8 days, ranging between 10.8 and 22.3 days. The most common complications were transient paresthesias of the ulnar and median nerves. Other complications included superficial palmar arch injuries, reflex sympathetic dystrophy, flexor tendon lacerations, and incomplete transverse carpal ligament division. All studies in which open and endoscopic techniques were compared reported that patients in the latter group experienced significantly less pain and returned to work and activities of daily living earlier. The reported success and complication rates of endoscopic carpal tunnel release surgery are similar to those for standard open procedures. Endoscopic techniques and outcomes are discussed.

show abstract

Surgery for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome: Endoscopic and open release compared in 10 patients

Cited by 18 publications

References 5 publications

Analysis of Reporting Return to Work in Studies Comparing Open with Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Analysis of Reporting Return to Work in Studies Comparing Open with Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Staged versus Simultaneous Bilateral Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: An Outcome Study

Endoscopic treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a critical review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About