Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23100191›Full record

Trial reportClinical orthopaedics and related research2013

Endoscopic carpal tunnel release is preferred over mini-open despite similar outcome: a randomized trial.

Ho Jung Kang, Il Hyun Koh, Tae Jin Lee, Yun Rak Choi

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05468814 (Comparison of Two Techniques for the Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome), which is not on this map. Cited by 44 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05468814 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Comparison of Two Techniques for the Treatment of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorHospital Universitario Reina Sofia de CordobaRan2022 to 2023Enrolled120ConditionsCarpal Tunnel SyndromeArmsZ-plasty, Conventional
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Similar effectiveness of the open versus endoscopic technique for carpal tunnel syndrome: a prospective randomized trial.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2015
    Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ho Jung KangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yonsei-ro 50, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, Korea.
Il Hyun Koh
Tae Jin Lee
Yun Rak Choi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe decision to perform endoscopic versus the mini-open carpal tunnel release technique is most likely left to surgeons rather than patients with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We hypothesized that (1) at 3 months after surgery, the subjective outcomes of endoscopic release, performed on one hand, and mini-incision release, performed on the other, would not differ in patients with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome; however, (2) each patient would likely prefer one technique over the other for specific reasons.

methodsFifty-two patients with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome had one hand randomized to undergo endoscopic release and the other to undergo mini-incision release. Each patient was assessed with the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) and DASH preoperatively and at each followup. Three months after surgery, the patients commented on which technique they preferred and completed a questionnaire regarding the reasons for not preferring the other technique.

resultsThe mean BCTQ symptom/function score and DASH improved similarly in the endoscopic release group and the mini-incision release group. Thirty-four patients preferred endoscopic release and 13 preferred the mini-incision technique. Scar or pillar pain was the most commonly cited factor in not preferring either technique followed by postoperative pain for the open technique and transient worsening of symptoms for the endoscopic technique.

conclusionsDespite similar improvements in BCTQ and DASH scores after endoscopic and open techniques at 3 months postoperatively, the majority of our patients preferred the endoscopic technique. The most concerning reason for not preferring the other technique was scar or pillar pain.

Indexed as

EndoscopyAdultAgedCarpal Tunnel SyndromeCicatrixDisability EvaluationFemaleHumansLigamentsMaleMiddle AgedOrthopedic ProceduresPain MeasurementPatient PreferencePostoperative PainRecovery of Function

Identifiers

PMID23100191
PMCPMC3613542

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.