ArticleThe Journal of hand surgery2023
Electrodiagnostic Predictors of Outcomes After In Situ Decompression of the Ulnar Nerve.
Article in The Journal of hand surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A retrospective comparative study comparing sensory outcomes of free arterialized forearm vs medial plantar venous flaps following finger pulp defect reconstruction.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Early symptom aggravation following ulnar nerve transposition for cubital tunnel syndrome: incidence, predictive factors, and threshold-based risk stratification.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
- Understanding risk factors for revision surgery after cubital tunnel release: Analysis of patient selection, surgeon, and clinical factors.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2024Article
- Comparison treatment of medium-sized volar fingertips defects with modified triangular neurovascular unilateral advancement flap versus digital artery dorsal perforator flap.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatients with severe ulnar neuropathy at the elbow frequently experience suboptimal surgical outcomes. Clinical symptoms alone may not accurately represent the severity of underlying nerve injury, calling for objective assessment tools, such as electrodiagnostic studies. The goal of our study was to determine whether specific electrodiagnostic parameters can be used to predict the outcomes after in situ decompression of the ulnar nerve.
methodsThis prospective study enrolled consecutive patients aged ≥18 years diagnosed with ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Patients completed a baseline battery of motor, sensory, functional, and electrodiagnostic tests before undergoing in situ decompression of the ulnar nerve. They were reassessed at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery. Forty-two patients completed at least 2 follow-up assessments and were included in the study.
resultsWhen controlling for other electrodiagnostic measurements and demographic factors, none of the electrodiagnostic parameters were predictive of outcomes at 12 months after surgery. Patients with decreased compound muscle action potential amplitudes demonstrated slower trends of recovery in grip strength, pinch strength, and overall scores on the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire as well as its function, work, and activities of daily living subscales, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire, and the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. Decreased motor nerve conduction velocity was predictive of slower recovery of 2-point discrimination and pinch strength.
conclusionsCompound muscle action potential amplitude, but not other conventional electrodiagnostic parameters, was predictive of functional outcomes after in situ decompression of the ulnar nerve. This parameter should play a role in determining the timing and prognosis of treatment for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.
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.