Endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a metanalysis of series published between 1983 and 1995, with focus on complication rates and postoperative sick-leave

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11-11
Author(s):  
A. I. Sørensen ◽  
M. E. H. Boeckstyns
Keyword(s):  
Sick Leave ◽  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release

WALANT Technique versus Sedation for Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472110031
Author(s):  
Ian Wellington ◽  
Antonio Cusano ◽  
Joel V. Ferreira ◽  
Anthony Parrino
Keyword(s):  
Local Anesthesia ◽  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Postanesthesia Care Unit ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Average Operating ◽  
Wide Awake ◽  
No Tourniquet ◽  
Room Time

Background This study sought to investigate complication rates/perioperative metrics after endoscopic carpal tunnel release (eCTR) via wide-awake, local anesthesia, no tourniquet (WALANT) versus sedation or local anesthesia with a tourniquet. Methods Patients aged 18 years or older who underwent an eCTR between April 28, 2018, and December 31, 2019, by 1 of 2 fellowship-trained surgeons at our single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into 3 groups: monitored anesthesia care with tourniquet (MT), local anesthesia with tourniquet (LT), and WALANT. Results Inclusion criteria were met by 156 cases; 53 (34%) were performed under MT, 25 (16%) under LT, and 78 (50%) under WALANT. The MT group (46.1 ± 9.7) was statistically younger compared with LT (56.3 ± 14.1, P = .007) and WALANT groups (53.5 ± 15.8, P = .008), F(2, 153) = 6.465, P = .002. Wide-awake, local anesthesia, no tourniquet had decreased procedural times (10 minutes, SD: 2) compared with MT (11 minutes, SD: 2) and LT (11 minutes, SD: 2), F(2, 153) = 5.732, P = .004). Trends favored WALANT over MT and LT for average operating room time (20 minutes, SD: 3 vs 32 minutes, SD: 6 vs 23 minutes, SD: 3, respectively, F(2, 153) = 101.1, P < .001), postanesthesia care unit time (12 minutes, SD: 7 vs 1:12 minutes, SD: 26 vs 20 minutes, SD: 22, respectively, F(2, 153) =171.1, P < .001), and door-to-door time (1:37 minutes, SD: 21 vs 2:51 minutes, SD: 40 vs 1:46 minutes, SD: 33, respectively, F(2, 153) = 109.3, P < .001). There were no differences in complication rates. Conclusions Our data suggest favorable trends for patients undergoing eCTR via WALANT versus MT versus LT.

scholarly journals Endoscopic treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a critical review

1997 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. E8 ◽  
Author(s):  
David F. Jimenez ◽  
Scott R. Gibbs ◽  
Adam T. Clapper
Keyword(s):  
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome ◽  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Palmar Arch ◽  
Endoscopic Techniques ◽  
Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Tunnel Syndrome ◽  
Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery ◽  
Mean Time

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.

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

Hand ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 252-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas A. Calotta ◽  
Joseph Lopez ◽  
E. Gene Deune
Keyword(s):  
Medical History ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Dominant Hand ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Student’S T

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.

Experiences with Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release

Swiss Surgery ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 181-185
Author(s):  
Buchli ◽  
Scharplatz
Keyword(s):  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release ◽  
Endoskopische Karpaltunnelspaltung

Im Spital Thusis wurden zwischen 1994 und 2000 122 Patienten wegen eines Karpaltunnelsyndroms operiert. Wir wollten wissen, ob die endoskopische Karpaltunnelspaltung in einem Regionalspital mit genügend hoher Sicherheit angewandt wurde und ob die Ergebnisse mit der offenen Karpaltunnelspaltung vergleichbar sind. In einer retrospektiven Studie konnten wir 82 Patienten mittels Fragebogen über das Operationsergebnis befragen. 39 Patienten wurden offen operiert, 26 mittels der Zweipfortentechnik nach Chow und 17 mittels Einpfortentechnik nach Agee. Schwere irreversible Komplikationen wurden nicht beobachtet. Bezüglich der Operationsergebnisse zeigten sich keine signifikanten Unterschiede in den drei Gruppen. Von den 39 offenen Karpaltunnelspaltungen klagten neun Patienten über Restbeschwerden, wobei es zu einer Reoperation wegen einer Thenarastverletzung kam. Bei den 26 endoskopischen Karpaltunnelspaltungen in Zweipfortentechnik traten bei acht Patienten Restbeschwerden auf, wobei eine Reoperation wegen exzessiver Vernarbung durchgeführt werden musste. Bei den 17 Operationen nach Agee hatten fünf Patienten Restbeschwerden, es musste jedoch keiner reoperiert werden. Die Studie zeigt, dass mit den drei unterschiedlichen Operationsverfahren bezüglich Sicherheit und Therapieerfolg vergleichbare Resultate erreicht wurden. Vorteile wegen dem atraumatischeren Zugang der endoskopischen Techniken konnten wir jedoch nicht objektivieren.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document