ArticleJournal of brachial plexus and peripheral nerve injury2025
Multiple Electrophysiological Evaluation of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.
Article in Journal of brachial plexus and peripheral nerve injury, 2025. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: To investigate a high-sensitivity electrodiagnostic (EDX) combination for diagnosing mild carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Methods: A total of 68 healthy controls (HCs, 136 hands) and 91 adult patients (CTSs, 162 hands) clinically diagnosed with CTS were enrolled. All patients accepted EDXs, including the sensory ganglia segment method of the median and ulnar nerves, and motor nerve conduction of the median and ulnar nerves. We examined the electrophysiological results and compared the sensitivity and specificity of various sensory nerve detection methods for the median nerve between the two groups. Results: The electrophysiological results of the CTSs were significantly different from those of HCs. All EDX techniques selected showed high specificity (>96.3%), positive predictive value (>95.2%), and large area under the curve (0.922 as the smallest) for the diagnosis of CTSs. A comparison of the median distal sensory latencies with the ulnar distal sensory latencies in fingers 2 and 4 showed a high sensitivity of 98.1%. Comparison of the nerve conduction study between the median and ulnar nerves in the same hand is the most reliable EDX technique for diagnosing very mild CTS because of its high sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: If clinical CTS patients exhibit normal median motor distal latency or sensory nerve conduction velocity across the wrist, a comparison of median and ulnar nerve conduction through the wrist, including M-U and M-U ringdiff, is recommended.
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.