Abstract
Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a condition that causes discomfort due to the compression of the median nerve in the wrist. Carpal tunnel release (CTR) is a surgical procedure that can help alleviate the symptoms of CTS. Two methods are commonly used for CTR: endoscopic carpal tunnel release (ECTR) and open carpal tunnel release (OCTR). The choice of method can impact surgical outcomes and potential complications. This review aims to compare the outcomes of both methods for individuals diagnosed with CTS. This systematic review analyzes the outcomes and potential complications of ECTR and OCTR for CTS. The study encompassed a comprehensive analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses comparing both methods. We searched for studies released between January 2012 and October 2023 on PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. The researchers assessed the quality of studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews) tool. The study's scope included a range of outcomes and complications, such as symptom relief, functional recovery, grip strength, return to work, patient satisfaction, scar sensitivity, pillar pain, wound complications, nerve-related issues, morphological changes, and recurrence. The review analyzed 11 studies, including seven RCTs and four meta-analyses. These studies evaluated 4367 ECTR and 4107 cases of OCTR. The patients' ages ranged from 46 to 58, and the follow-up periods ranged from three to 24 months. The findings reveal that ECTR has comparable or better outcomes than OCTR, particularly in postoperative discomfort, functional recovery, grip strength, resumption of work, and patient satisfaction. Additionally, ECTR has lower levels of scar sensitivity, pillar pain, and wound-related complications than OCTR. However, ECTR carries a higher risk of reversible nerve injury. There were no substantial differences between the two techniques regarding other potential complications. Both ECTR and OCTR are safe and effective interventions for CTS. ECTR has benefits like faster recovery and improved cosmetic outcomes but requires higher technical proficiency and carries the risk of nerve injury. The choice of technique should consider patient preference, cost-effectiveness, and surgeon expertise.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
