ArticleCureus2024
A Retrospective Cohort Study of Decompressive Techniques for Cubital Tunnel Syndrome: In Situ Decompression Versus Ulnar Nerve Transposition.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS) is the second most common nerve entrapment syndrome of the upper extremity after carpal tunnel syndrome. In situ decompression (ISD) and ulnar nerve transposition (UNT) are the major surgery methods in practice for the treatment of CuTS. However, controversies exist over the efficacy and safety of these methods.
aimThe objective of the study was to compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes in patients treated with ISD and UNT surgery.
methodThis was a retrospective study comprising 56 patients who underwent either ISD or UNT at Naresuan University Hospital between January 2013 and December 2022. Data on age, sex, hand involved, duration of the surgery, duration of the symptoms including the clinical outcomes such as elbow range of motion (ROM), quick disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (QuickDASH), McGowan grade (MGG), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain scores, motor and sensory conduction velocity (MCV1, MCV2, and SCV), and Tinel's sign were collected during the two-week, one-month, three-month, and six-month follow-ups post-surgery.
resultsOf the 56 patients in the study, 62.5% were female. The number of patients aged <60 years was higher in both groups. The mean age of patients in the ISD group was 49.07±6.13 years, while in the UNT group, it was 51.5±7.04 years. After one month, 53.57% and 32.14% of the patients recovered to MGG 1 in the ISD and UNT groups, respectively. The majority of the patients had MGG 1 six months after the surgery. The QuickDASH score and pain scores of the patients improved during all follow-ups, but no statistical significance was revealed when the two techniques were compared.
conclusionThe study found that both the ISD and UNT were efficient and safe in treating CuTS. Further study with the inclusion of parameters such as revision surgery and complications would be vital.
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.