ArticleFrontiers in cellular neuroscience2026
A comparative study of clinical efficacy, electrophysiological outcomes, and perioperative parameters between endoscopic carpal tunnel release and open carpal tunnel release for carpal tunnel syndrome.
Article in Frontiers in cellular neuroscience, 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
Purpose: To compare the clinical efficacy of endoscopic (ECTR) and open (OCTR) carpal tunnel release for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and provide evidence-based surgical guidance. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted including 112 consecutive patients with CTS treated at our institution between January 2022 and December 2024. Based on the surgical approach, patients were assigned to an ECTR group or an OCTR group. Surgical selection was determined by patients' preference, cosmetic expectations, and the surgeon's technical assessment. Primary outcome measures were the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire Symptom Severity Score (BCTQ-SSS), Functional Status Score (BCTQ-FSS), and pain assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Secondary outcome measures included median nerve electrophysiological indices [sensory nerve conduction velocity (SNCV), sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) amplitude, distal motor latency (DML), and compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude], operative time, hospitalization cost, and postoperative complications. All outcomes were evaluated preoperatively and at the final follow-up (cutoff date: February 2026, with postoperative follow-up duration ranging from 13 to 48 months). Results: Eighty-two eligible patients were followed up for a median of 34 months (13-48 months). Both groups showed significant improvements in VAS, BCTQ scores, and electrophysiological parameters versus baseline (all Conclusion: ECTR and OCTR have comparable mid-term efficacy for CTS. OCTR is more cost-effective with shorter operative time, while ECTR's minimally invasive advantages need further confirmation. Surgical choice should be individualized based on patient preferences and institutional resources.
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.