J Korean Orthop Assoc.  2011 Dec;46(6):457-463.

Long-Term Changes of the Clinical and Nerve Electrophysiological Findings after Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release

• Cheon SJ
• Moon KP
• Lim JM

Abstract

PURPOSE
The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical symptoms and function and the nerve electrophysiological changes between the pre-operative and long-term post-operative states of patients who underwent surgical treatment with endoscopic release of the carpal tunnel for idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This study was performed in 48 patients and 88 wrists with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome. All patients were treated with endoscopic carpal tunnel release using a single portal. The preoperative and the 3 years 5 months long-term postoperative clinical symptoms and function were evaluated using the Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire. The nerve electrophysiological status was evaluated using the Bland grade system.
RESULTS
When the preoperative Bland grade was 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, the range of the change of the symptom severity score was 1.38, 1.68, 2.40, 1.61 and 1.28, respectively, and the range of the change of the functional status score was 0.60, 1.34, 1.58, 0.93 and 0.88, respectively, at the long-term follow-up. The clinical symptoms were signifi cantly improved at the fi nal follow-up when the preoperative Bland grade was 2, 3, 4 and 5. The function was signifi cantly improved for all the preoperative Bland grades. On the nerve electrophysiological study, there was statistical improvement of the distal motor latency of the motor nerve and the nerve conduction velocity and amplitude of the sensory nerve. When the preoperative Bland grade was 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6, the extent of improved grade was 0.60, 0.75, 2.17, 2.87 and 4.25, respectively, at the long-term follow-up, and the Bland grade was signifi cantly improved when the preoperative Bland grade was 3, 4, 5 and 6. However, there was no statistical signifi cance between the Bland grade and the clinical state at the long-term follow-up.
CONCLUSION
The clinical and nerve electrophysiological states were significantly improved at the long-term follow-up after endoscopic carpal tunnel release. When the preoperative Bland grade was 3, 4 and 5, the clinical symptoms, function and the nerve electrophysiological states were signifi cantly improved at the long-term follow-up.

Keyword

idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome; endoscopic carpal tunnel release; long-term follow-up outcomes; Boston carpal tunnel questionnaire; Bland grade

MeSH Terms

Boston
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Neural Conduction
Surveys and Questionnaires
Wrist

Reference

1. Haupt WF, Wintzer G, Schop A, Löttgen J, Pawlik G. Long-term results of carpal tunnel decompression. Assessment of 60 cases. J Hand Surg Br. 1993. 18:471–474.

2. Simpson JA. Electrical signs in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel and related syndromes. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1956. 19:275–280.

3. Thomas PK. Motor nerve conduction in the carpal tunnel syndrome. Neurology. 1960. 10:1045–1050.

4. Loong SC. The carpal tunnel syndrome: a clinical and electrophysiological study of 250 patients. Clin Exp Neurol. 1977. 14:51–65.

5. Padua L, Padua R, Lo Monaco M, Aprile I, Tonali P. Italian CTS Study Group. Multiperspective assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome: a multicenter study. Neurology. 1999. 53:1654–1659.

6. Mondelli M, Reale F, Sicurelli F, Padua L. Relationship between the self-administered Boston questionnaire and electrophysiological findings in follow-up of surgically-treated carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br. 2000. 25:128–134.

7. Bland JD. Do nerve conduction studies predict the outcome of carpal tunnel decompression? Muscle Nerve. 2001. 24:935–940.

8. Senda M, Hashizume H, Terai Y, Inoue H, Nagashima H. Electromyographic evaluation after endoscopic carpal tunnel release in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome. J Orthop Sci. 1999. 4:187–190.

9. Bland JD. A neurophysiological grading scale for carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve. 2000. 23:1280–1283.

10. Kaplan SJ, Glickel SZ, Eaton RG. Predictive factors in the non-surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br. 1990. 15:106–108.

11. Phalen GS. The carpal-tunnel syndrome. Seventeen years' experience in diagnosis and treatment of six hundred fifty-four hands. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1966. 48:211–228.

12. Okutsu I, Ninomiya S, Takatori Y, Ugawa Y. Endoscopic management of carpal tunnel syndrome. Arthroscopy. 1989. 5:11–18.

13. Chow JC. Endoscopic release of the carpal ligament: a new technique for carpal tunnel syndrome. Arthroscopy. 1989. 5:19–24.

14. Erdmann MW. Endoscopic carpal tunnel decompression. J Hand Surg Br. 1994. 19:5–13.

15. Kang ES, Hahn SB, Shin KH, Kang HJ, Lee W, Park JS. Carpal tunnel syndrome. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 1991. 26:847–853.

16. Kim SJ, Kang WS, Park JH. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release. J Korean Orthop Assoc. 1993. 28:2429–2434.

17. Mackinnon SE, McCabe S, Murray JF, et al. Internal neurolysis fails to improve the results of primary carpal tunnel decompression. J Hand Surg Am. 1991. 16:211–218.

18. Hobbs RA, Magnussen PA, Tonkin MA. Palmar cutaneous branch of the median nerve. J Hand Surg Am. 1990. 15:38–43.

19. Atroshi I, Larsson GU, Ornstein E, Hofer M, Johnsson R, Ranstam J. Outcomes of endoscopic surgery compared with open surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome among employed patients: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2006. 332:1473.

20. Friol JP, Chaise F, Gaisne E, Bellemère P. Endoscopic decompression of the median nerve in the carpal tunnel. Apropos of 1,400 cases. Ann Chir Main Memb Super. 1994. 13:162–171.

21. Heybeli N, Kutluhan S, Demirci S, Kerman M, Mumcu EF. Assessment of outcome of carpal tunnel syndrome: a comparison of electrophysiological findings and a self-administered Boston questionnaire. J Hand Surg Br. 2002. 27:259–264.

22. Atroshi I, Johnsson R, Ornstein E. Patient satisfaction and return to work after endoscopic carpal tunnel surgery. J Hand Surg Am. 1998. 23:58–65.

23. Higgs PE, Edwards DF, Martin DS, Weeks PM. Relation of preoperative nerve-conduction values to outcome in workers with surgically treated carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am. 1997. 22:216–221.

24. Straub TA. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release: a prospective analysis of factors associated with unsatisfactory results. Arthroscopy. 1999. 15:269–274.

25. Kulick MI, Gordillo G, Javidi T, Kilgore ES Jr, Newmayer WL 3rd. Long-term analysis of patients having surgical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am. 1986. 11:59–66.

26. Padua L, LoMonaco M, Aulisa L, et al. Surgical prognosis in carpal tunnel syndrome: usefulness of a preoperative neurophysiological assessment. Acta Neurol Scand. 1996. 94:343–346.

27. Weber RA, Rude MJ. Clinical outcomes of carpal tunnel release in patients 65 and older. J Hand Surg Am. 2005. 30:75–80.

28. Weber RA, DeSalvo DJ, Rude MJ. Five-year follow-up of carpal tunnel release in patients over age 65. J Hand Surg Am. 2010. 35:207–211.

29. Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ, et al. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993. 75:1585–1592.

30. Reale F, Ginanneschi F, Sicurelli F, Mondelli M. Protocol of outcome evaluation for surgical release of carpal tunnel syndrome. Neurosurgery. 2003. 53:343–350.

31. Mondelli M, Reale F, Padua R, Aprile I, Padua L. Clinical and neurophysiological outcome of surgery in extreme carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Neurophysiol. 2001. 112:1237–1242.