SynthesisClinical orthopaedics and related research2015
Open versus endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 98 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Comparative Outcomes of Endoscopic and Open Carpal Tunnel Release with Neurotrophic Supplementation in Severe Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Very Early Outcomes in Endoscopic Versus Open Carpal Tunnel Release
Who cites it
98 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 232 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic plantar fasciotomy versus open plantar fasciotomy for treatment of plantar fasciitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- Time to recovery following open and endoscopic carpal tunnel decompression: meta-analysis.BJS open · 2025Pooled it
- Local corticosteroid injection versus surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Open versus Single- or Dual-Portal Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Pooled it
- Quality analysis of prior systematic reviews of carpal tunnel syndrome: an overview of the literature.Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina · 2022Pooled it
- Open versus endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Sickness absence after carpal tunnel release: a systematic review of the literature.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health · 2018Pooled it
- Intraindividual comparison between open and endoscopic release in bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Brain and behavior · 2016Pooled it
- "Intraoperative pillar corticosteroid injection": does it improve clinical outcomes after carpal tunnel release surgery? A double-blind, randomized controlled study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Trial
- Outcomes of Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release Surgery With Home Guided Hand Therapy Versus No Hand Therapy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial After Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Trial
- Platelet-rich Plasma or Autologous Blood Do Not Reduce Pain or Improve Function in Patients with Lateral Epicondylitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2020Trial
- A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Open and Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release Within the Same Patient.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Trial
- Similar effectiveness of the open versus endoscopic technique for carpal tunnel syndrome: a prospective randomized trial.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2015Trial
- Very Early Outcomes in Endoscopic Versus Open Carpal Tunnel Release.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2027Article
- Review
- Assessment of 'spin' in the abstracts of systematic reviews in leading orthopaedic surgery journals over the past 10 years: a cross-sectional methodological study.EFORT open reviews · 2026Article
- Endoscopic Versus Open Carpal Tunnel Release in Obese and Nonobese Patients.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Pillar pain after carpal tunnel release: an evidence-based review of pathophysiology, diagnostic strategies, and a structured clinical decision-making framework.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Review
- Enhancing Recovery After Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: The Role of Neurotrophic Supplementation.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCarpal tunnel syndrome is a common compressive neuropathy of the median nerve. The efficacy and safety of endoscopic versus open carpal tunnel release remain controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether endoscopic compared with open carpal tunnel release provides better symptom relief, validated outcome scores, short- and long-term strength, and/or digital sensibility; entails a differential risk of complications such as nerve injury, scar tenderness, pillar pain, and reoperation; allows an earlier return to work; and takes less operative time.
methodsThe English-language literature was searched using MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials that compared endoscopic and open carpal tunnel release were included in the meta-analysis. Methodologic quality was assessed with the Consolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) checklist, and a sensitivity analysis was performed. Symptom relief, Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) scores, strength, digital sensibility, complications, reoperation, interval to return to work, and operative time were analyzed. Twenty-one randomized controlled trials containing 1859 hands were included.
resultsEndoscopically treated patients showed similar symptom relief and BCTQ scores; better early recovery of grip strength (mean difference [MD], 3.03 kg [0.08-5.98]; p = 0.04) and pinch strength (MD, 0.77 kg [0.33-1.22]; p < 0.001) but no advantage after 6 months; lower risk of scar tenderness (risk ratio [RR], 0.53 [0.35-0.82]; p = 0.005); higher risk of nerve injury (RR, 2.84 [1.08-7.46]; p = 0.03), most of which were transient neurapraxias. Similar risk of pillar pain and reoperation; an earlier return to work (MD, -8.73 days [-12.82 to -4.65]; p < 0.001); and reduced operative time (MD, -4.81 minutes [-9.23 to -0.39]; p = 0.03).
conclusionsHigh-level evidence from randomized controlled trials indicates that endoscopic release allows earlier return to work and improved strength during the early postoperative period. Results at 6 months or later are similar according to current data except that patients undergoing endoscopic release are at greater risk of nerve injury and lower risk of scar tenderness compared with open release. While endoscopic release may appeal to patients who require an early return to work and activities, surgeons should be cognizant of its elevated incidence of transient nerve injury amid its similar overall efficacy to open carpal tunnel release. Additional research is required to define the learning curve of endoscopic release and clarify the influence of surgeon volume on its safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.