ArticleIBRO neuroscience reports2025
Electrophysiological analysis of distal, proximal, and dual compression of the median nerve.
Article in IBRO neuroscience reports, 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.
- The Pronator Teres Muscle Revisited: Morphological Classification, Neurovascular Entrapment, and Surgical Implications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
Objective: Both distal and proximal compression of the median nerve can lead to hand numbness inpatients.This study aimed to dissect the electrophysiological characteristics of median nerve motor fibers inpatients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) caused by distal median nerve compression, C8 - T1 nerve root - type cervical spondylosis (CRS) resulting from proximal median nerve compression, and double - compression syndrome (DCS) with CTS combined with C8 - T1 CRS, so as to verify the double - nerve compression theory, provide evidence-based basis for clinical treatment. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 30 subjects per group (CTS, CRS, DCS, controls) from a neurophysiological database. Parameters included distal motor latency (DML1-wrist, DML2-elbow), compound muscle action potential (CMAP1, CMAP2), wrist-elbow motor conduction velocity (MCV), and F-wave latency. Results: For each indicator, both the CTS group and the DCS group showed statistically significant differences from the normal group. When comparing between the CTS group and the DCS group, there were no statistically significant differences in all data indicators. When comparing the CRS group with the normal group, there were no statistically significant differences in DML1 and DML2, but there were statistically significant differences in the shortest latency of the F wave and the motor conduction velocity (MCV). Conclusion: Double compression does not cause more severe damage to the nerve compared with simple distal compression. Distal compression of the median nerve causes more severe damage to the peripheral nerve than proximal compression. For patients with double compression syndrome, clinical treatment should prioritize the treatment of the distal compression site.
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.