Our results of mini open approach in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome

Year 2015, Volume: 42 Issue: 4, 510 - 513, 08.01.2016

Azad Yıldırım Ahmet Kapukaya Şehmus Yiğit Ramazan Atiç Yılmaz Mertsoy Mehmet Çaçan

Abstract

Objective: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the results of patients underwent surgical release with mini open surgical method due to Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and the surgical technique.

Methods: 50 wrists of the 42 patients that we could reach after they were applied mini open surgical method between 2009- 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. After surgery, patients were followed for an average 47.4 months. CTS was detected in 26 of the patients in right hand, in 10 of the patients in left hand and in seven of them bilaterally. In 27 Preoperative patients advanced in 21 intermediate and in 2 mild Electromyography (EMG) findings compliant with CTS were found.

Results: We did not apply a second operation to any of our patients. None of the patients showed any post operative sensitivity on scar tissue and there was no neurovascular damage in any patients during the surgery. The patients returned to their daily activities average on the 10th day after the surgery [range 7-15 days]. In their follow up EMG was not done on a routine basis to the patients. Patients were followed clinically.

Conclusion: The advantages of the surgery process we conducted with over pillar mini incision compared to other techniques that there is less pillar region pain and less scar tenderness, shorter return to work and the technique is efficient, cheap and easy to apply.

Key words: Carpal tunnel, mini open, pillar

Keywords

Karpal tünel, mini açık, pillar

References

• Aydin K, Cokluk C, Piksin, et al. Ultrasonographically checking the sectioning of the transverse carpal ligament during carpal tunnel surgery with limited uni skin incisions. Turk Neurosurg 2007;17:219-223.
• Kureshi SA, Friedman AH, et al. Carpal tunnel release: Surgical
• considerations. Techniq Neurosurg 2000;6:5-13.
• Okutsu I. Operative treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome. Brain Nerve 2007;59:1239-1245.
• Singer G, Ashworth CR et al. Anatomic variations and carpal
• tunnel syndrome: 10-year clinical experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;(392):330-340.
• Phalen GS. The carpal tunnel syndrome: Seventeen year- experience in diagnosis and treatment of six hundred fifty four hands. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1966;48:211-228.
• Zambelis T, Tsivgoulis G, Karandreas N, et al. Carpal tunnel syndrome: associations between risk factors and laterality. Eur Neurol 2010;63:43-47.
• Kuhlman KA, Hennessey WJ, et al. Sensitivity and specificity
• of carpal tunnel syndrome signs. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1997;76:451-457.
• Wilson KM. Double incision open technique for carpal tunnel
• release: An alternative to endoscopic release. J Hand Surg 1994;19:907-912.
• Thomsen NOB, Cederlund R, Rosen J, et al. Clinical outcomes of surgical release among diabetic patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: prospective follow up with matched controls. J Hand Surg 2009;34:1177-1187.
• Becker J, Nora DD, Gomes I, et al. An evaluation of gender, obesity, age and diabetes mellitus as risk factors for carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Neurophysiol 2002;113:1429-1434.
• Leit ME, Weiser RW, Tomaino MM, et al. Patient reported outcome after carpal tunnel release for advanced disease: a
• prospective and longitudinal assessment in patients older than age 70. J Hand Surg 2004;29:379-383.
• Bickel KD. Carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am 2010;35:147-152.
• Szabo RM. Entrapment and Compression Neuropathies. In: Green DP, Hotchkiss RN, Pederson WC (eds). Green’s Operative
• Hand Surgery. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone Company; 1999:1404-1422.