SynthesisJournal of ultrasound2023
Sonographic normal values for the cross-sectional area of the ulnar nerve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of ultrasound, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of thigh muscle status and longitudinal changes assessed by MRI with subsequent total hip arthroplasty: insights from the osteoarthritis initiative.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2026Article
- Ulnar Nerve Cross-sectional Area among Ulnar Neuropathy Patients and Healthy Subjects - A Study in Hospital-based Population of Eastern India.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of sonographic ulnar nerve cross-sectional area cutoff values at and around the medial epicondyle for diagnosing ulnar neuropathy at the elbow in wheelchair users.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2025Observational
- Cubital tunnel syndrome: anatomy, pathology, and imaging.Skeletal radiology · 2025Review
- Cross-Sectional Area and Echogenicity Reference Values for Sonography of Peripheral Nerves in the Lithuanian Population.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison of distortion correction preprocessing pipelines for DTI in the upper limb.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeNerve size is a commonly used sonographic parameter when assessing suspected entrapment of the ulnar nerve. We aimed to create a robust set of normal values, based on a critical review of published normal values.
methodsWe performed a systematic evaluation of studies on normal ulnar nerve sizes, identified in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Using meta-analyses, we determined pooled mean cross-sectional area (CSA) values for different anatomical locations of the ulnar nerve throughout the arm. Subgroup analyses were performed for gender, probe frequency, in- or exclusion of diabetic patients, position of the elbow and Asian versus other populations.
resultsWe identified 90 studies of which 77 studies were included for further analyses after quality review, resulting in data from 5772 arms of 3472 participants. Subgroup analyses show lower CSA values at at the wrist crease and proximal to the wrist crease when using low frequency probes (< 15 MHz) and at the wrist crease, proximal to the wrist crease, proximal forearm and the distal upper arm in Asians. CSA values were lower when in flexed position compared to extended position for the cubital tunnel inlet only. No difference was found for gender.
conclusionsOur systematic review provides a comprehensive set of normal values at sites along the entire length of the ulnar nerve. This provides a foundation for clinical practise and upon which future studies could be more systematically compared.
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.