scholarly journals Ultrasound-guided vs. landmark-guided local corticosteroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. e138-e139
Author(s):  
A. Babaei-Ghazani ◽  
P. Roomizadeh ◽  
A. Shirin
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fu-An Yang ◽  
Ya-Chu Shih ◽  
Jia-Pei Hong ◽  
Chin-Wen Wu ◽  
Chun-De Liao ◽  
...  

Abstract Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) refers to the symptoms and signs caused by the compression of the median nerve in the carpal tunnel. It can be treated by corticosteroid injection into the carpal tunnel. Two methods for injection have been employed, namely ultrasound-guided and landmark-guided injection. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare these methods in terms of several outcomes. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified, and data collection was completed on 7 October 7, 2020. Results for continuous variables are expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. The analysis included eight RCTs published between 2013 and 2019 with a total of 448 patients. Ultrasound-guided injection yielded more favorable results for the Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire, Symptom Severity Scale [SMD = −0.49, 95% CI (−0.74, −0.25), P < 0.0001], Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire, Functional Status Scale [SMD = −0.24, 95% CI (−0.42, −0.06), P = 0.01], distal motor latency [SMD = −0.36, 95% CI (−0.70, −0.02), P = 0.04], and compound muscle action potential [SMD = 0.38, 95% CI (0.16, 0.61), P = 0.0008] . Ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection is recommended for patients with CTS.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fu-An Yang ◽  
Ya-Chu Shih ◽  
Jia-Pei Hong ◽  
Chin-Wen Wu ◽  
Chun-De Liao ◽  
...  

AbstractCarpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) refers to the symptoms and signs caused by the compression of the median nerve in the carpal tunnel. It can be treated by corticosteroid injection into the carpal tunnel. Two methods for injection have been employed, namely ultrasound-guided and landmark-guided injection. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare these methods in terms of several outcomes. A search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases was performed from the date of their inception to October 7, 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results for continuous variables are expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. The analysis included eight RCTs published between 2013 and 2019 with a total of 448 patients. Ultrasound-guided injection yielded more favorable results than landmark-guided injection for the Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire, Symptom Severity Scale [SMD =  − 0.43, 95% CI (− 0.68, − 0.19), P = 0.0005] and Boston Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Questionnaire, Functional Status Scale [SMD =  − 0.50, 95% CI (− 0.84, − 0.15), P = 0.005]. Ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection is recommended for patients with CTS.


2021 ◽  
pp. 026921552110147
Author(s):  
Hongchen Wang ◽  
Yuting Zhu ◽  
Hongyu Wei ◽  
Chunke Dong

Objective: This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided (US-guided) versus landmark-guided (LM-guided) local corticosteroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Methods: Database including Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The outcomes mainly included Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ): Symptom Severity Scale (BCTQs), Functional Status Scale (BCTQf); and electrophysiological indexes: distal motor latency (DML), sensory distal latency (SDL), compound muscle action potential (CAMP), sensory nerve action potential amplitude (SNAP), and sensory nerve conduction velocity (SNCV). Adverse events were also recorded. Results: Overall, nine RCTs were finally screened out with 469 patients (596 injected hands). Pooled analysis showed that US-guided injection was more effective in BCTQs (SMD, −0.69; 95% CI, −1.08 to −0.31; P = 0.0005), BCTQf (SMD, −0.23; 95% CI, −0.39 to −0.07; P = 0.005), CAMP (MD, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.35−0.94; P < 0.0001) improvement, and a lower rate of adverse events (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.22−0.52; P < 0.00001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the US-guided injection had significantly better CMAP than the LM-guided for the in-plane approach (MD, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.36−1.01; P < 0.0001) but not for the out-plane approach (MD, 0.39; 95% CI, −0.39 to 1.17; P = 0.33). Conclusions: US-guided injection was superior to LM-guided injection in symptom severity, functional status, electrodiagnostic, and adverse events improvement for CTS. To some extent, the in-plane approach yields better results compared with the out-plane process under US guidance.


2021 ◽  
pp. 175319342110017
Author(s):  
Saskia F. de Roo ◽  
Philippe N. Sprangers ◽  
Erik T. Walbeehm ◽  
Brigitte van der Heijden

We performed a systematic review on the success of different surgical techniques for the management of recurrent and persistent carpal tunnel syndrome. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria and were grouped by the type of revision carpal tunnel release, which were simple open release, open release with flap coverage or open release with implant coverage. Meta-analysis showed no difference, and pooled success proportions were 0.89, 0.89 and 0.85 for simple open carpal tunnel release, additional flap coverage and implant groups, respectively. No added value for coverage of the nerve was seen. Our review indicates that simple carpal tunnel release without additional coverage of the median nerve seems preferable as it is less invasive and without additional donor site morbidity. We found that the included studies were of low quality with moderate risk of bias and did not differentiate between persistent and recurrent carpal tunnel syndrome.


Author(s):  
Ahmed M. Ahmed ◽  
Osama G. Hassan ◽  
Ahmed A. Khalifa

Abstract Background Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common upper limb entrapment neuropathy; severe cases are treated surgically and mild to moderate can be managed conservatively. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to define the efficacy of gabapentin as an adjuvant to splinting in the treatment of mild to moderate CTS. Methods A systematic search through 13 databases, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting the use of gabapentin with splinting in CTS were included and analyzed. Results Three RCTs including 170 patients were eligible. There was no significant difference between gabapentin plus splinting and splinting alone in 5 measured parameters: (1) Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) [MD (95% CI) = − 0.76 (− 2.46–0.93), p = 0.378], (2) Functional Status Scale (FSS) [MD (95% CI) = − 0.23 (− 1.40–0.94), p = 0.701], (3) visual analogue scale (VAS) to assess pain [MD (95% CI) = − 0.6 (− 1.47–0.27), p = 0.174], (4) Grip strength [MD (95% CI) = − 0.11 (− 0.70–0.48), p = 0.718], and (5) pinch strength [MD (95% CI) = 0.72 (− 0.10–1.54), p = 0.083]. Conclusion This review provides low-quality evidence that gabapentin plus nocturnal splinting is not superior to splinting alone. More high-quality trials are needed to determine the role of this drug as an adjuvant in the management of CTS.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document