medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2014, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2014; 28 (3)

Prognostic factors in carpal tunnel syndrome surgery

Ezquerra-Herrando L, Gómez-Vallejo J, Corella-Abenia E, Albareda-Albareda J

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 160-163
PDF size: 157.43 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Carpal tunnel syndrome is the most frequent peripheral neuropathy and it affects nearly 3% of the general population. Although electromyography tests have become the gold standard for diagnosis, currently there is controversy between the correlation of clinical data and electromyography for diagnosis. The purpose of this work is to study this correlation and determine the possible prognostic factors in this pathology. Material and methods: 139 patients who underwent surgery were reviewed retrospectively between January 1995 and December 2008. All patients had an electromyography preoperatively to obtain motor conduction rate and latency, sensitive conduction rate and clinical examination, especially the Tinel and Phalen signs in order to correlate them with the final postoperative symptoms. In order to establish if there were statistically significant differences, these were determined through the T-Student and χ2. Results: Preoperatively, there is a clinical correlation (p ‹ 0.05) between the Tinel and Phanel clinical signs with the compression electrophysiological grading. Likewise, there is a correlation between clinical persistence in the postoperative period with motor conduction rate and latency involvement specified in the preoperative electrophysiological tests. Conclusion: Electrophysiological tests in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome have an added prognostic value with regards to the final result after surgery.


REFERENCES

  1. Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Johnsson R, Ornstein E, Ranstam J, Rosen I: Prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in a general population. JAMA. 1999; 282: 153-8.

  2. Stevens JC, Beard CM, O’Fallon WM, Kurland LT: Conditions associated with carpal tunnel syndrome. Mayo Clin Proc. 1992; 67: 541-8.

  3. Kendall W: Results of treatment of severe carpal tunnel syndrome without internal neurolysis of the median nerve. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988; 70: 151.

  4. Somaiah A: Carpal tunnel syndrome. Ulster Med J. 2008; 77(1): 6-17.

  5. American Academy of Neurology, American Association of Electro diagnostic Medicine and American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation: Practice parameter for electro diagnostic studies in carpal tunnel syndrome (summary statement). Neurology. 1993; 43(11): 2404-5.

  6. Jablecki CK, Andary MT, So YT, Wilkins DE, Williams FH: Literature review of the usefulness of nerve conduction studies and electromyography for the evaluation of patients with the carpal tunnel syndrome. AAEM Quality Assurance Committee. Muscle Nerve. 1993; 16(12): 1392-414.

  7. Jeremy DP, Bland MB: Treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve. 2007; 36: 167-71.

  8. Bland JD: Do nerve conduction studies predict the outcome of carpal tunnel decompression? Muscle Nerve. 2001; 24: 935-40.

  9. Choi SJ, Ahn DS: Correlation of clinical history and electrodiagnostic abnormalities with outcome after surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998; 102: 2374-80.

  10. Glowacki KA, Breen CJ, Sachar K, et al: J Hand Surg. Electrodiagnostic testing and carpal tunnel released outcome. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996; 21A: 117-22.

  11. Taleisnik J: The palmar cutaneous branch of the median nerve and the approach to the carpal tunnel. An anatomical study. J Bone Joint Surg. 1973; 55(6)A: 1212-7.

  12. Grundberg AB: Carpal tunnel descompression in spite normal electromyography. J Hand Surgery. 1983; 8: 348-9.

  13. González del Pino J, Delgado-Martínez AD, González I, et al: Value of the carpal compression test in the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Hand Surgery. 1997; 22B: 38-41.

  14. Gunnarsson SS, Amilon A, Hellstrand P, et al: The diagnosis of the carpal syndrome. J Hand Surgery. 1997; 22B: 34-7.

  15. DeKrom MC, Knipschild PG, Kester ADM: Efficacy of the provocative test of carpal tunnel syndrome. Lancet. 1990; 335: 393-5.

  16. Jonson EW: Diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome. The gold standard. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 1993; 72: 1.

  17. Ogura T, Akiyo N, Kubo T: The relationship between nerve conduction study and clinical grading of carpal tunnel syndrome. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery. 2003; 11(2): 190-3.

  18. Dudley-Porras AF, Rojo-Alaminos P, Vinuales JI, et al. Value of electrodiagnostic tests in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg. 2000; 25(4): 361-5.

  19. Jordan R, Carter J, Cummins C: A systematic review of the utility of electrodiagnostic testing in carpal tunnel syndrome. British Journal of General Practice. 2002; 52: 670-3.

  20. Aulisa L, Tamburrelli F, Padua R, et al: Carpal tunnel syndrome: indication for surgical treatment based on electrophysiologic study. J Hand Surgery. 1998; 23(4)A: 687-91.

  21. Nathan PA, Keniston RC, Meadows KD, et al: Predictive value of nerve conduction measurements at the carpal tunnel. Muscle Nerve. 1993; 16: 1937-82.

  22. Iida J, Hirabayshi H, Nakase H: Carpal tunnel syndrome: electrophysiological grading and surgical results by minimum incision open carpal tunnel release. Neurol Med Chir. 2008; 48: 554-9.

  23. Cung MS, Gong HS, Baek GH: Raynaud’s phenomenon in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg. 2000; 82B: 818-9.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com