ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Revision Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: An Update on Technique and Outcomes.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Manual Therapy vs. Surgery: Which Is Best for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Relief?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Carpal tunnel release is among the most frequently conducted upper extremity procedures. While it typically provides patients with improved sensation, decreased pain, and improved function, a small percentage of cases require revision due to failed initial surgery. Consequently, adoption of endoscopic techniques for carpal tunnel revision procedures is beginning to be explored. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of postoperative clinical visits and patient-reported outcome measures for four patients who had undergone five endoscopic revision carpal tunnel release procedures (one patient had bilateral disease). All five cases had symptoms consistent with recurrent carpal tunnel syndrome. Results: One hundred percent (5 of 5) of cases resulted in patients reporting symptom improvement. Postoperative clinical visits and improved patient-reported outcome measures (QuickDash, PROMIS Upper Extremity, VAS Pain, PSEQ, PHQ, and Surgery Satisfaction) scores from baseline to 6 weeks demonstrated successful postoperative function and symptom resolution. Five of five cases resulted in patients resuming normal activities without restrictions within 1-5 weeks, with an average of 3.4 weeks. Conclusions: Preliminary findings suggest the endoscopic revision procedure may be safe and effective for patients with recurrent carpal tunnel syndrome, extending the indications to include scars proximal to the wrist crease. Moreover, this minimally invasive procedure facilitates a transition back to normal activities and avoids incisions on weight-bearing surfaces of the palm. Adopting endoscopic revision may reduce the need for prolonged postoperative care and physical therapy. However, due to the limited sample size of five patients, further investigation with larger cohorts is warranted to confirm these observations.
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.