ArticleJournal of wrist surgery2026
Effectiveness of Endoscopic versus Open Carpal Tunnel Release on Severe Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.
Article in Journal of wrist surgery, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The present study aims to evaluate the patient-reported outcomes of endoscopic carpal tunnel release (CTR) compared with open release in patients with electrodiagnostically confirmed severe carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Materials and Methods: Patients with severe CTS who underwent either open or endoscopic CTR between 2017 and 2021 were included in the study, with 38 patients in the open group and 35 in the endoscopic group. Electronic medical records were reviewed for demographic and clinical data, including preoperative Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (QuickDASH) scores. Patient outcomes, including postoperative QuickDASH scores, were collected via telephonic survey. Results: At the time of surgery, the median age of patients in the open group was 61 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 54-69) and 66 years (55-76) in the endoscopic group. At a mean of 5 years follow-up, complete resolution of symptoms was reported in 34 of 38 (89.5%) cases in the open group. In the endoscopic group, all 35 cases showed complete resolution at a mean of 3 years follow-up. This difference was not statistically significant ( Conclusion: The present study suggests that endoscopic and open CTR offer similar outcomes, supporting both options as safe and effective treatment for severe CTS.
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.