Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research - Symptoms, Causes, Trauma, Diagnosis, Physiotherapy

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research Today is a free monthly online journal that collates and summarizes the latest research about Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, including details on symptoms, causes, trauma, diagnosis, physiotherapy.


Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research Today

Home

View Latest Issue

Information About Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Books on Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Advertising in Research Today

View Other Research Today Publications



Intra-individual comparison between open and 2-portal endoscopic release in clinically matched bilateral carpal syndrome.

Rab M, Grünbeck M, Beck H, Haslik W, Schrögendorfer KF, Schiefer HP, Mittlböck M, Frey M

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. mathias.rab@meduniwien.ac.at

Based upon bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) we undertook a prospective randomised intra-individual comparison between open (OR) and 2-portal endoscopic release (2-PER) to establish if there is any demonstrable advantage in undertaking either technique in a 1 year follow-up. Ten patients with bilateral CTS were enrolled in this study and underwent a 2-PER on the one and an OR with two minimised incisions on the contralateral hand. Both hands were examined pre- and postoperatively after 2, 4, 6 and 12 weeks and after 6 and 12 months, respectively. Preoperatively both hands revealed statistically no significant differences in all the parameters recorded. Comparing both techniques no significant differences could be detected in the follow-up period. Nevertheless, both techniques showed significant improvements in the severity of symptoms and pain, in sensory nerve testing and in electro-diagnostic parameters, when comparing pre- with postoperative data after 1 year. The endoscopic approach revealed no distinct advantages over the open technique not only in the late but also in the early postoperative follow-up period when performing intra-individual comparison. Considering the higher complication rate and costs when performing 2-PER the OR with two minimised incisions seems to be a good alternative in order to keep the recovery period as short as possible.

Published 19 June 2006 in J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 59(7): 730-6.
Full-text of this article is available online (may require subscription).

Place a permanent text-link or advertisement here for just US$15.

© 2005-2008 Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research Today. All Rights Reserved.



Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Research Today Archive:

Volume 1 (2005)
  Issue 1 (October)
  Issue 2 (November)
  Issue 3 (December)

Volume 2 (2006)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 3 (2007)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 4 (2008)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)



Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Books

Double-Crush Syndrome

Double-Crush Syndrome