A One-Stop Carpal Tunnel Clinic

INTRODUCTION

By December 2008, 90% of referrals requiring hospital admission will need to be seen and treated within the 18-week patient pathway. Previously, patients within our trust with suspected carpal tunnel syndrome had to wait 3 months to see a specialist in clinic and, once assessed, would have to wait up to a further 6 months for an open carpal tunnel decompression under local anaesthetic (OCTD/LA). We set up a one-stop clinic, where patients would have their out-patient consultation and surgery on the same day. We evaluated the clinic in order to assess whether it led to reduced waiting times whilst maintaining good clinical outcome and patient satisfaction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were selected on the basis of the standard referral letter alone. Those selected were then assessed by a single surgeon in the clinic. The patients deemed appropriate underwent an OCTD/LA and were discharged the same day. Patients were followed up with a patient satisfaction and Boston questionnaire.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients underwent 63 OCTD/LA, waiting an average of 2.2 months (9 weeks) from referral. There was high patient satisfaction and improvement in symptoms following treatment in the clinic.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe a one-stop carpal tunnel clinic can be an efficient and cost-effective way of treating this common condition.     

Endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release: A short-term comparative study

Objective:

To compare the results of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (CTR) with open CTR in patients with idiopathic Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

Materials and Methods:

Seventy-one patients with CTS were enrolled in a prospective randomized study from May 2003 to December 2005. All patients had clinical signs or symptoms and electro-diagnostic findings consistent with carpal tunnel syndrome and had not responded to nonoperative management. Sixty-one cases were available for follow-up. Endoscopic CTR was performed in 30 CTS patients and open CTR was performed in 31 wrists (30 patients). Various parameters were evaluated, including each patient''s symptom amelioration, complications, operation time, time needed to resume normal lifestyle and the frequency of revision surgery. All the patients were followed up for six months.

Results:

During the initial months after surgery, the patients treated with the endoscopic method were better symptomatically and functionally. Local wound problems in terms of scarring or scar tenderness were significantly more pronounced in patients undergoing open CTR compared to patients undergoing endoscopic CTR. Average delay to return to normal activity was appreciably less in group undergoing endoscopic CTR. No significant difference was observed between the endoscopic CTR group and open CTR group in regard to symptom amelioration, electromyographic testing and complications at the end of six months.

Conclusion:

Short-term results were better with the endoscopic method as there was no scar tenderness. Results at six months were comparable in both groups.     

肘管综合征29例分析

报告1982年至1995年手术治疗肘管综合征29例,均行尺神经松解前置术,部分还进行了神经内松解。优良率达92％。作者认为在分析尺神经卡压因素时,要重视由于肘管弓状韧带解剖变异所致的卡压因素。另外,肌电检查或分段肌电检查很有必要,不只是对肘管综合征的诊断与鉴别诊断有意义,而且对手术方式的选择决定是否神经内松解亦有特殊的意义。在手术显微镜下进行无损伤操作是提高疗效的重要手段。     

透明外导管行Chow法内镜治疗腕管综合征

目的探讨内镜下采用透明外导管双入口Chow法施行腕横韧带松解术治疗腕管综合征的疗效及安全性。方法选取2008年7月至2013年3月在北京大学第一医院以透明外导管行双入口Chow法治疗腕管综合征的27例患者38个腕关节。其中男4例,女23例;年龄25~66岁,平均52.81岁;右腕12例,左腕4例,双腕11例。根据术前症状按滨田分类法分级,Ⅰ级9腕,Ⅱ级6腕,Ⅲ级23腕。手术采用局麻、止血带,腕部小切口引入透明导管,在透明外导管内可分辨出肌腱、韧带、神经的情况下切开腕横韧带,松解正中神经。结果术后随访2~47个月,平均17.67个月。失访6例,共随访32个腕关节。单腕平均手术时间15 min,出血0 mL。术后1例出现疼痛、麻木加重,无正中神经、血管、肌腱损伤及神经黏连等并发症,无二次手术者。无皮肤深浅感觉障碍、无切口瘢痕疼痛者。握力及捏力均不同程度改善。术后Kelly分级评定,优18腕,良9腕,一般4腕,差1腕,优良率为84.3%。分级为一般及差的5例均出现在术前滨田分类Ⅲ级的患者中。结论关节镜下用可视的透明外套管行"双孔道"Chow法腕横韧带松解术结合了Chow法与Okutsu法的优点,皮肤切口小,组织创伤轻,手术时间短,术后不需石膏外固定,不残留大的手术瘢痕。此方法是一种有效且操作安全性高的微创术式。     

Muscle atrophy at diagnosis of carpal and cubital tunnel syndrome

PURPOSE: This study was designed to test the hypothesis that patients with an initial diagnosis of cubital tunnel syndrome are more likely to present with muscle atrophy than patients with an initial diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. METHODS: A list of patients presenting to the office of a single hand surgeon from January 2000 to June 2005 with an initial diagnosis of isolated, idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome or cubital tunnel syndrome was generated from billing records. The medical records of 58 patients with cubital tunnel syndrome and 370 patients with carpal tunnel syndrome were reviewed for age, gender, diabetes, and presence of atrophy. RESULTS: Twenty-three of 58 patients with an initial diagnosis of cubital tunnel syndrome had atrophy compared with only 62 out 370 patients with an initial diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Multiple logistic regression revealed that age (odds ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.08) and diagnosis (cubital tunnel patients were more likely than carpal tunnel patients to present with atrophy; odds ratio, 4.5; 95% CI, 2.7-8.6) were factors significantly associated with atrophy at presentation. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with carpal tunnel syndrome present earlier in the course of their disease than patients with cubital tunnel syndrome. Patients with cubital tunnel syndrome are more likely to present with muscle atrophy, reflecting advanced nerve damage that may not respond to surgery.     

Comparative Anatomy of the Subsynovial Connective Tissue in the Carpal Tunnel of the Rat, Rabbit, Dog, Baboon, and Human

The tenosynovium in the human carpal tunnel is connected to the flexor tendons and the median nerve by the subsynovial connective tissue (SSCT). The most common histological finding in carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), a compression neuropathy of the median nerve, is noninflammatory fibrosis of the SSCT. The relationship, if any, between the fibrosis and nerve pathology is unknown, although some have speculated that a change in the SSCT volume or stiffness might be the source of the compression. Yet, while animal models have been used to study the physiology of nerve compression, so far none have been used to study the relationship of the SSCT pathology to the neurophysiological abnormalities. The purpose of this study was to identify animal models that might be appropriate to study the interaction of SSCT and nerve function in the development of CTS. The front paws of a rat, rabbit, dog, and baboon were dissected. The carpal tunnel anatomy and SSCT of these animals were also examined by light and scanning microscopy and compared to the relevant human anatomy and ultrastructure. The carpal tunnel anatomy and contents of the baboon and rabbit are similar to humans. The canine carpal tunnel lacks the superficial flexor tendons and the rat carpal tunnel is very small. The human, baboon, and rabbit specimens had very similar organization of the SSCT, and content of the carpal canal. We conclude that, while both the baboon and rabbit would be good animal models to study the relationship of the SSCT to CTS, the rabbit is likely to be more practical, in terms of cost and animal care concerns.     

绕肝提拉法前入路肝切除术(附6例临床报告)

目的　绕肝提拉法 (liverhangingmaneuver)进一步提高前入路肝切除术 (anteriorapproach)的安全性。方法　钝性分离肝后下腔静脉前间隙而形成肝后隧道。通过该隧道安放绕肝带 ,前入路肝切除时拉紧绕肝带 ,配合自行设计的止血板 ,完成 6例复杂肝切除术。结果　 6例成功安放绕肝带 ,未发生与该操作有关的并发症 ,前入路肝切除时肝正中裂界面内管道显露清楚 ,绕肝带具有指示作用。结论　复杂肝切除时使用绕肝带和止血板 ,有助于提高前入路肝切除的安全性。保证断肝能在最短的界面上进行。     

Opioid Versus Nonopioid Analgesia After Carpal Tunnel Release: A Randomized,Prospective Study

Background: The purpose of this investigation was to compare pain control and patient satisfaction for conventional postoperative opioid analgesia and nonopioid multimodal analgesia after elective open or endoscopic carpal tunnel release (CTR). Methods: As part of a randomized, prospective study, patients undergoing primary, elective CTR were randomized to receive either postoperative opioids or nonopioid medications as part of a multimodal pain control strategy. Patients currently taking opioids were excluded. Patients completed a postoperative pain journal and completed the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH), Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire, Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and satisfaction ratings at their 2-week visit. Results: A total of 68 patients were included. Preoperatively, there were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to pain scores, coping skills, or carpal tunnel symptoms. At 2 weeks postoperatively, patients in the nonopioid group had lower average NPRS and QuickDASH scores. Patients who took opioids consumed an average of 5 pills. No patient randomized to the nonopioid group required any opioids. Patients in the nonopioid group demonstrated lower early postoperative NPRS scores. Patient satisfaction with their pain control regimen and outcome was not significantly different between the 2 groups at any time point. Conclusions: Nonopioid medications as part of a perioperative pain control strategy demonstrate improved pain scores compared with opioid medications with similar patient satisfaction and functional outcomes. Considering the risks associated with the use of opioid analgesics, we recommend against prescribing opioids after CTR, particularly in patients not currently taking narcotic medications.     

Morphological Analysis of the Carpal Tunnel

Although carpal tunnel release is one of the most commonly performed procedures in the USA, the morphology of the carpal tunnel as determined previously in the literature has been questioned. Previous methodology has been questioned for accuracy by recent studies. The purpose of this study was to perform a morphological analysis of the carpal tunnel and correlate carpal tunnel and hand dimensions. The carpal tunnels of ten cadaveric specimens were emptied of their contents and a silicone cast of the carpal tunnel was then created. This cast was then digitized, and the dimensions of the carpal tunnel were calculated. These dimensions were compared with the measured hand dimensions of the specimens. The width, depth, tilt angle, length, cross-sectional area, and volume of the carpal tunnel were 19.2 ± 1.7 mm, 8.3 ± 0.9 mm, 14.8 ± 7.8°, 12.7 ± 2.5 mm, 134.9 ± 23.6 mm², and 1,737 ± 542 mm³, respectively. Width, depth, and cross-sectional area did not change significantly along the length of the carpal tunnel, but tilt angle did. The width of the palm strongly correlates with the width of the carpal tunnel. Other dimensional correlations did not reach statistical significance. The carpal tunnel is of uniform dimension along its length. The long axis of the carpal tunnel in cross-section rotates volarly from the radial side of the hand increasingly with distal progression along the carpal tunnel. Based on our analysis of ten cadaveric specimens, the width of the carpal tunnel may be estimated by the width of the palm using the equation: \textWidt\texth_\textCT = 1.285 + 0.236 ×\textWidt\texth_\textpalm {\text{Widt}}{{\text{h}}_{\text{CT}}} = 1.285 + 0.236 \times {\text{Widt}}{{\text{h}}_{\text{palm}}} .     

Endoscopic cubital tunnel release

A minimally invasive endoscopic approach has been successfully applied to surgical treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome. This procedure allows for smaller incisions with faster recovery time. This article details relevant surgical anatomy, indications, contraindications, surgical technique, complications, and postoperative management.     

Outcomes of open and endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a meta-analysis

Background

Currently, there are two genres of surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome, open versus endoscopic. The goal of our study is to analyze published data by comparing outcomes of surgical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome and determine if one approach is superior to the other (open versus endoscopic).

Methods

A meta-analysis of retrospective series of Carpal tunnel release including >20 patients, with results measuring outcomes based on at least six of the following nine parameters (paresthesia relief, scar tenderness, two-point discrimination, thenar muscle weakness, Semmes–Weinstein/SW monofilament testing, return to work time, grip and pinch strength, and complications).

Results

Endoscopic carpal tunnel approach showed statistically superior outcomes in eight of the nine categories investigated. Only in the category of complications (mean occurrence of 1.2 % in the open release versus 2.2 % in the endoscopic release group) was the endoscopic group inferior.

Conclusion

This suggests that the endoscopic release is superior to the open release, particularly in experienced hands.