ArticleEFORT open reviews2025
Network meta-analysis comparing WALANT, locoregional, local and general anesthesia techniques in carpal tunnel release.
Article in EFORT open reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical impact of wide-awake local anesthesia no tourniquet (WALANT) in carpal tunnel release: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- What's New in Wide-Awake Local Anesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) Hand Surgery?Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare anesthesia techniques (WALANT (wide-awake anesthesia no tourniquet), locoregional anesthesia, local anesthesia with tourniquet or sedation) for carpal tunnel release (CTR). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library up to May 2023. Two independent reviewers selected the studies and extracted the data. The primary outcomes included the pain experienced at the moment of anesthesia and during the surgery and the mean morphine equivalents (MME) administered following the surgery and overall patient satisfaction. Our secondary outcomes consisted of the mean room occupancy time and the mean duration of the procedure, followed by the complication rate. The review process was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Results: A total of 3166 studies were identified, which included 23 studies comparing various anesthesia types and 28,748 CTR surgeries. The WALANT group experienced significantly lower pain levels during anesthesia (-2.67 (95% CIs: 0.12-4.99)) and surgery (-2.04 (95% CIs: 0.08-4.07)) compared to the local anesthesia group. There was no difference in the use of MME for pain relief among different anesthesia techniques. Satisfaction rates were comparable, but WALANT exhibited the highest probability for utmost satisfaction. The mean room occupancy time was lower in patients receiving local anesthesia compared with when sedation was added, with a mean difference of -27.16 (95% CIs: -52.03 to -1.85). Conclusions: The WALANT technique for CTR reported better outcomes for pain (during anesthesia and surgery), higher satisfaction and low probability to expand the operating room occupancy time. Level of evidence: Level II of evidence.
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.