SynthesisMedicine2016
Efficacy, safety, and cost of surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 11 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Local corticosteroid injection versus surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- A randomized comparative trial of corticosteroid phonophoresis, local corticosteroid injection, and low-level laser in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome.Laser therapy · 2020Article
- The Direct and Indirect Costs to Society of Carpal Tunnel Release.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2020Article
- Acupuncture plus night splint for quality of life and disability in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized controlled trial.Integrative medicine research · 2019Article
- Epidemiological Features of Spinal Cord Injury in China: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in neurology · 2018Article
- Motor Examination in the Diagnosis of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2017Article
- The mini-incision technique for carpal tunnel release using nasal instruments in Chinese patients.Medicine · 2017Article
- Article
- The Acupuncture Effect on Median Nerve Morphology in Patients with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: An Ultrasonographic Study.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2017Article
- Efficacy of Keyhole Approach to Carpal Tunnel Syndrome under Ambulatory Strategy.Neurology research international · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2017-04-01Error in Analyses ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCarpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common peripheral nerve entrapment disease. Either surgical or conservative intervention for CTS patients is needed to choose. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical efficacy, safety, and cost of surgical versus nonsurgical intervention.
methodsThe eligible studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Google, and Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by 2 of the coauthors independently and were analyzed by RevMan5.3. Standardized mean differences (SMDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess risk of bias.
resultsThirteen studies including 9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 4 observational studies were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from moderate to high. The difference of clinical efficacy was statistically significant between surgical and nonsurgical intervention, and nonsurgical treatment was more effective (OR = 2.35, 95%CI = 1.18-4.67, P = 0.01). Meanwhile, different results were discovered by subgroup analysis. The pooled results of function improvement, symptom improvement, neurophysiological parameters improvement, and cost of care at different follow-up times showed that the differences were not statistically significant between the 2 interventions. The difference of complications and side-effects was statistically significant and conservative treatment achieved better result than surgery (OR = 2.03, 95%CI = 1.28-3.22, P = 0.003). Sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results.
conclusionBoth surgical and conservative interventions had benefits in CTS. Nonsurgical treatment was more effective and safety than surgical treatment, but there were no significant differences in function improvement, symptom improvement, neurophysiological parameters improvement, and cost of care. Nonsurgical treatment is recommended as the optical choice for CTS. If conservative treatment fails, surgical release can be taken.
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.