Tarsal tunnel syndrome: current rationale, indications and results

Tarsal tunnel syndrome (TTS) is a neuropathy due to compression of the posterior tibial nerve and its branches. It is usually underdiagnosed and its aetiology is very diverse. In 20% of cases it is idiopathic. There is no test that diagnoses it with certainty. The diagnosis is usually made by correlating clinical history, imaging tests, nerve conduction studies (NCSs) and electromyography (EMG). A differential diagnosis should be made with plantar fasciitis, lumbosacral radiculopathy (especially S1 radiculopathy), rheumatologic diseases, metatarsal stress fractures and Morton’s neuroma. Conservative management usually gives good results. It includes activity modification, administration of pain relief drugs, physical and rehabilitation medicine, and corticosteroid injections into the tarsal tunnel (to reduce oedema). Abnormally slow nerve conduction through the posterior tibial nerve usually predicts failure of conservative treatment. Indications for surgical treatment are failure of conservative treatment and clear identification of the cause of the entrapment. In these circumstances, the results are usually satisfactory. Surgical success rates vary from 44% to 96%. Surgical treatment involves releasing the flexor retinaculum from its proximal attachment near the medial malleolus down to the sustentaculum tali. Ultrasound-guided tarsal tunnel release is possible. A positive Tinel’s sign before surgery is a strong predictor of surgical relief after decompression. Surgical treatment achieves the best results in young patients, those with a clear aetiology, a positive Tinel’s sign prior to surgery, a short history of symptoms, an early diagnosis and no previous ankle pathology. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:1140-1147. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210031

Percutaneous versus Transcutaneous Electrical Stimulation of the Posterior Tibial Nerve in Idiopathic Overactive Bladder Syndrome with Urinary Incontinence in Adults: A Systematic Review

Background: Percutaneous electrical stimulation and transcutaneous electrical stimulation (PTNS and TTNS) of the posterior tibial nerve are internationally recognized treatment methods that offer advantages in terms of treating patients with overactive bladder (OAB) who present with urinary incontinence (UI). This article aims to analyze the scientific evidence for the treatment of OAB with UI in adults using PTNS versus TTNS procedures in the posterior tibial nerve. Methods: A systematic review was conducted, between February and May 2021 in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, in accordance with the PRISMA recommendations. Results: The research identified 259 studies, 130 of which were selected and analyzed, with only 19 used according to the inclusion requirements established. The greatest effectiveness, in reducing UI and in other parameters of daily voiding and quality of life, was obtained by combining both techniques with other treatments, pharmacological treatments, or exercise. Conclusions: TTNS has advantages over PTNS as it is more comfortable for the patient even though there is equality of both therapies in the outcome variables. More research studies are necessary in order to obtain clear scientific evidence.

Tibial nerve stimulation compared with sham to reduce incontinence in care home residents: ELECTRIC RCT

Background Urinary incontinence is prevalent in nursing and residential care homes, and has a profound impact on residents’ dignity and quality of life. Treatment options are limited in these care contexts and care homes predominantly use absorbent pads to contain incontinence, rather than actively treat it. Transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation is a non-invasive, safe, low-cost intervention that is effective in reducing urinary incontinence in adults. Objective To determine the clinical effectiveness of transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation to treat urinary incontinence in care home residents and to determine the associated costs of the treatment. Design A multicentre, pragmatic, participant and outcome assessor-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Setting A total of 37 UK residential and nursing care homes. Participants Care home residents with at least weekly urinary incontinence that is contained using absorbent pads and who are able to use a toilet/toilet aid with or without assistance. Interventions Residents were randomised (1 : 1) to receive 12 30-minute sessions of transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation or sham stimulation over a 6-week period. Main outcome measures Primary outcome – change in volume of urine leaked over a 24-hour period at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes – number of pads used, Perception of Bladder Condition, toileting skills, quality of life and resource use. Results A total of 408 residents were randomised (transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation, n = 197; sham stimulation, n = 209); two exclusions occurred post randomisation. Primary outcome data were available for 345 (85%) residents (transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation, n = 167; sham stimulation, n = 178). Adherence to the intervention protocol was as follows: 78% of the transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation group and 71% of the sham group received the correct stimulation. Primary intention-to-treat adjusted analysis indicated a mean change of –5 ml (standard deviation 362 ml) urine leakage from baseline in the transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation group and –66 ml (standard deviation 394 ml) urine leakage in the sham group, which was a statistically significant, but not clinically important, between-group difference of 68-ml urine leakage (95% confidence interval 0 to 136 ml; p = 0.05) in favour of the sham group. Sensitivity analysis supported the primary analysis. No meaningful differences were detected in any of the secondary outcomes. No serious adverse events related to transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation were reported. Economic evaluation assessed the resources used. The training and support costs for the staff to deliver the intervention were estimated at £121.03 per staff member. Estimated costs for delivery of transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation during the trial were £81.20 per participant. No significant difference was found between participants’ scores over time, or between transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation and sham groups at any time point, for resident or proxy quality-of-life measures. Conclusions The ELECTRIC (ELECtric Tibial nerve stimulation to Reduce Incontinence in Care homes) trial showed, in the care home context (with a high proportion of residents with poor cognitive capacity and limited independent mobility), that transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation was not effective in reducing urinary incontinence. No economic case for transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation was made by the cost–consequences analysis; however, the positive reception of learning about urinary incontinence for care home staff supports a case for routine education in this care context. Limitations Completing 24-hour pad collections was challenging for care home staff, resulting in some missing primary outcome data. Future work Research should investigate transcutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation in residents with urgency urinary incontinence to determine whether or not targeted stimulation is effective. Research should evaluate the effects of continence training for staff on continence care in care homes. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN98415244 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03248362. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 41. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Comparison of Cross Sectional Area of Posterior Tibial Nerve in Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy Patients with That of Healthy Controls Using High Resolution Ultrasonography - A Cross Sectional Comparative Descriptive Study from Bangalore

BACKGROUND Patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) suffer from numbness, burning feet, lightning pain, and pins-and-needles sensations. Recently, High resolution ultrasonography is commonly used for evaluation of peripheral nerve diseases because of its easy availability, time saving and non-invasiveness of the procedure. This study intended to compare the cross sectional area (CSA) of posterior tibial nerve (PTN) in type 2 diabetic patients with peripheral neuropathy with that of non-diabetic healthy adults using high resolution ultrasonography (HRU) and study the role of increase in HbA1c level and severity of DPN comparing with CSA of PTN. METHODS A cross sectional comparative descriptive study was conducted from November 2018 to May 2020 with 50 type 2 diabetic patients and 50 healthy adults. 50 type 2 diabetic patients, clinically diagnosed with DPN were analysed and using the Toronto Clinical Neuropathy Score (TCNS) System, the severity of neuropathy was determined. HbA1c level and other demographic data were collected. 50 healthy adults were taken as controls. The CSA of posterior tibial nerve was measured 3 cm proximal to the medial malleolus in both lower limbs using HRU. RESULTS The mean CSA of posterior tibial nerve in healthy subjects was 6.0 + / - 0.142 mm2 , and in diabetic patients with peripheral neuropathy was 11.77 + / - 0.291 mm2 . Upon comparing the mean CSA of posterior tibial nerve of diabetic subjects with peripheral neuropathy and control subjects were statistically significant (P < 0.001) in unpaired ‘t’ test. In our study, CSA of the posterior tibial nerve correlated significantly with TCNS and HbA1c levels, at P < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS This study showed that there is a significant difference between the cross sectional areas of posterior tibial nerve in diabetic subjects with peripheral neuropathy and healthy adult subjects. HRU can detect cross sectional area changes in the posterior tibial nerve early. Thus, ultrasonography can be used as a good screening tool in these patients. KEYWORDS Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy, Posterior Tibial Nerve, High Resolution Ultrasonography

Comparison of Sacral Nerve Stimulation (SNS) and Posterior Tibial Nerve Stimulation (TNS) for Treatment of Fecal Incontinence: Literature Review and Meta-analysis

Aim. To evaluate and compare effectivenes of sacral and posterior tibial nerve stimulation for treating fecal incontinence.Methods. Systematic literature review was performed to compare sacral and posterior tibial nerve stimulation effectiveness. Research was performed in “Medline” database, using the “PubMed” website. English or lithuanian articles, published between 2008 and 2019, were included in our study. Results were described to assess the effect of interventions in each analysed article. We included 7 articles into meta-analysis. Articles compared the effectiveness of sacral or posterior tibial nerve stimulation with control groups or other treatment methods for managing fecal incontinence. Cochrane guidelines were used to perform this meta-analysis. Results. The results of meta-analysis suggests that sacral neuromodulation is superior to posterior tibial nerve stimulation to treat fecal incontinence compared to control groups or other treatments. Literature also suggest that after comparing these methods directly, sacral neuromodulation is superior to treat fecal incontinence a. Conclusion. Sacral neuromodulation is superior posterior tibial nerve stimulation to treat temporary or chronical fecal incontinence than and can be used as an alternative for surgical interventions.

Surgical Treatment of Tarsal Tunnel Syndrome - Case Report

The first description of tarsal tunnel syndrome is recent. Koppel in 1960 evoked the after-effects of lesions of the posterior tibial nerve. Keck in 1969 was the first to describe compression of the posterior tibial nerve by the internal annular ligament. It was a young soldier who, after intensive training, had bilateral plantar anesthesia. The opening of the internal annular ligament had allowed a total recovery in 48 hours. Our objective here is to discuss the circumstances of the diagnosis of this syndrome, to analyze its anatomical and pathological causes, to present the types of treatments followed, in the light of the literature.