ReviewJPRAS open2023
"Anesthesia for Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Release: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Local Versus Regional Versus General Anesthesia".
Review in JPRAS open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost Analysis of Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release with MAC versus Local Anesthesia.Journal of wrist surgery · 2026Article
- Cubital Tunnel Release Under Local and Regional Anesthesia: A Scoping Review.Plastic surgery (Oakville, Ont.) · 2025Review
- Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release With Monitored Anesthesia Care Versus Local Anesthesia: Analysis of Operative Times and Patient-Reported Outcomes.Journal of hand surgery global online · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Worldwide, carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral neuropathy due to compression. A minimally invasive endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) procedure is available to treat this condition. This study aims to identify and compare the different types of anesthesia in ECTR, particularly in terms of functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, and operative time. Methods: PRISMA guideline was used to design and conduct this systematic review. MEDLINE, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were searched systematically from inception to May 2022. For the search, MeSH terms such as ECTR, general anesthesia, local anesthesia (LA), and regional anesthesia were used. Results: As a result of reviewing the literature, 198 publications were reviewed. After implanting our criteria, 12 studies were included. We included 14589 patients who underwent ECTR. LA has a higher satisfaction rate and a shorter operative time than general anesthesia. LA had a mean operative time of 20.1 min, compared to 45 min and 51 min for regional anesthesia and general anesthesia. The number of patients with postoperative ECTR surgical complications was 2.7% (95%CI). After ECTR with LA, 95% of patients are back to their daily routine within six months. Conclusion: All the reported methods were effective, with LA being the most commonly used. Furthermore, it showed a shorter operative time and a higher satisfaction rate than other types of anesthesia. Due to the heterogeneity of the data, we recommend future randomized controlled trials to highlight the differences in anesthesia types used in ETCR. Level of evidence: III, risk/prognostic study.
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.