ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2026
Return-to-Work After Carpal Tunnel Release Across Surgical Techniques: A Narrative Review.
Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2026. 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.
- Return-to-Work and Early Functional Recovery Following Office-Based Ultrasound-Guided Microinvasive Carpal Tunnel Release: A Prospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) is the most common upper-limb entrapment neuropathy and remains a major contributor of work-related disability. While Carpal Tunnel Release (CTR) reliably improves symptoms, functional recovery is less consistently reported. Return-to-Work (RTW) has emerged as a practical functional outcome, but definitions and reporting remain heterogeneous. We conducted a narrative review of English-language studies reporting RTW or work-absence outcomes following open, endoscopic, ultrasound-guided, ultraminimally invasive, and microinvasive CTR techniques. Due to variability in study design and RTW definitions, findings were synthesised descriptively. Across the literature, RTW durations progressively shortened as procedural invasiveness decreased. Open CTR commonly reported RTW at four to six weeks, endoscopic techniques at two to four weeks, and ultrasound-guided approaches at approximately 10-21 days. Recent ultraminimally invasive and microinvasive systems frequently reported RTW within one to two weeks when performed under local anaesthesia. These findings highlighted RTW as a meaningful functional benchmark and underscore the role of imaging-guided access minimisation in accelerating postoperative recovery.
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.