ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2014
Setting expectations following endoscopic cubital tunnel release.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Open Versus Endoscopic Cubital Tunnel In Situ Decompression: A Systematic Review of Outcomes and Complications.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2017Pooled it
- Incidence and Patient-Level Risk Factors for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Following Cubital Tunnel Surgery.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Direct Economic Burden of Cubital Tunnel Surgery in the United States: Total Payments and Components of Cost.The Journal of hand surgery · 2025Article
- When Numbness and Tingling Play a Role-Sexual Function in Compressive Neuropathy.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2024Article
- Psychological Aspects of Nerve Gap Reconstruction: Addressing Patient Perspectives and Expectations.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2024Article
- Endoscopic versus open in situ decompression for the management of cubital tunnel syndrome.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2022Article
- Patient Expectations for Symptomatic Improvement before Cubital Tunnel Release.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2022Article
- Symptom Recurrence After Endoscopic Cubital Tunnel Release.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2020Article
- Prevalence and Clinical Manifestations of the Anconeus Epitrochlearis and Cubital Tunnel Syndrome.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Article
- Surgical Approaches and Their Outcomes in the Treatment of Cubital Tunnel Syndrome.Frontiers in surgery · 2018Review
- Results of endoscopically-assisted cubital tunnel release without using any specific instrument.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2017Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective was to evaluate recovery characteristics of patients undergoing endoscopic cubital tunnel release (ECuTR) by determining the following: (1) return to work (RTW) times following ECuTR compared with RTW times of patients that underwent anterior transposition of the ulnar nerve (ATUN), (2) satisfaction rates and factors affecting satisfaction, (3) resolution rates of common preoperative complaints and findings, and (4) effect of preoperative ulnar nerve subluxation on postoperative outcomes.
methodsA total of 172 cases in 148 patients undergoing ECuTR were prospectively enrolled including 56 women and 92 men. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to determine RTW time for ECuTR patients and for a cohort of 15 patients that underwent ATUN. Patients were evaluated for subjective and objective complaints preoperatively and postoperatively. Cases were grouped by Dellon's classification preoperatively and modified by Bishop's postoperatively.
resultsHalf of ECuTR patients returned to normal work within 8 days postoperatively versus 71 days following ATUN. Variables significantly negatively affecting RTW were male sex, manual labor, and worker's compensation status. Dellon's was the best predictor of postoperative satisfaction. Complete resolution of symptoms occurred in 86 % of patients for weakness, 81 % for pain, 79 % for numbness and tingling (N/T), 78 % for atrophy, 76 % for abnormal two-point discrimination, and 65 % for Wartenberg's. Preoperative ulnar nerve subluxation had no effect on outcome.
conclusionsImproved RTW time following ECuTR versus ATUN indicates potential and substantial cost-saving implications with respect to reduced worker productivity loss. Patients with more severe preoperative Dellon's classification can expect less optimal results regarding postoperative satisfaction and resolution rates of N/T and pain.
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.