Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32160494›Full record

ArticleJoint diseases and related surgery2020

Comparison of two approaches for carpal tunnel release: Extended versus mini-open technique.

Mehmet Orçun Akkurt, Serdar Düzgün, Ahmet Ateş, Yüksel Uğur Yaradılmış

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Joint diseases and related surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Mehmet Orçun AkkurtDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Yıldırım Beyazıt University, Yenimahalle Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Serdar Düzgün
Ahmet Ateş
Yüksel Uğur Yaradılmış

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study aims to describe a retrospective study using prospectively gathered data to compare mini-open and extended open release techniques for moderate to severe carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). PATIENTS AND

methodsThe data of 198 consecutive patients (139 males, 59 females; mean age 57.0±4.5 years; range, 44 to 75 years) treated for CPS were used. For matching, age, gender and severity of the compression, the Greathouse Ernst Halle Schaffer neurophysiological classification system was used. After matching, 63 observations in each group (group 1: mini-open and group 2: extended open) were used for analysis. A Jamar hydraulic hand dynamometer was used to measure pre- and postoperative third month grip strengths. The key pinch test was performed also at third month. Patients completed the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire at the last follow-up.

resultsSymptom severity and functional status were improved up to half fold in both groups at final follow-up; however, there was no statistically significant clinical difference between the groups (p>0.05). There were totally six patients with paresthesia symptoms (three in each group; 4.7%), which improved in three months. Eight patients (6.3%, one in group 1 and seven in group 2, p=0.032) had dysesthesia and pillar pain.

conclusionMini-open and extended open carpal tunnel release have similar clinical outcomes without any major complications.

Indexed as

Carpal Tunnel SyndromePainParesthesiaDecompression, SurgicalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePain MeasurementRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeWrist

Identifiers

PMID32160494
PMCPMC7489116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.