ArticleSICOT-J2022
Percutaneous ultrasound-guided ulnar nerve release technique compared to open technique: A cadaveric study.
Article in SICOT-J, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The emerging field of ultrasound-guided nerve decompression surgery: a narrative review.International orthopaedics · 2025Review
- The rectus abdominis tendon insertion to the pubic bone and its clinical implications: A cadaveric study.SICOT-J · 2025Article
- Prospective evaluation of a novel device for ultrasound-guided percutaneous treatment of carpal tunnel and trigger finger disease. Efficacy and safety of sono-instruments®.Journal of ultrasound · 2024Article
- Article
- The ultrasound-guided percutaneous release technique for De Quervain's disease using an acupotomy.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the outcomes of a novel percutaneous ultrasound-guided technique for release of ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow when compared to standard open release Methods: One single surgeon performed an ultrasound-guided percutaneous release of the cubital tunnel on a group of five cadaveric elbows and open release on five others. All procedures were timed, and incision lengths were recorded. Meticulous anatomic dissection was then performed to assess the complete release of the carpal tunnel and iatrogenic injuries.
resultsNo significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of complete release and iatrogenic injury, whereas Operative time was significantly shorter for the US-guided technique. Incomplete releases of the nerve were found only during the first two trials in each group, while the third, fourth, and fifth trials showed a complete ulnar nerve release in both series, highlighting a fast learning curve for both techniques. All of this through a significantly smaller incision in the US-guided technique.
conclusionsThis study highlights the similar effects of these two techniques in terms of complete release of the ulnar nerve, with no clear superiority of one over the other in terms of morbidity rate. Both have a fast learning curve for an ultrasound-trained surgeon, with the US-guided technique being a less traumatic and quicker alternative procedure.
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.