Ulusoy İbrahim, Yılmaz Mehmet, Tantekin Mehmet Fırat, Güzel İsmail, Kıvrak Aybars
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Turkey Selahaddin Eyyubi State Hospital, Diyarbakır 21070, Turkey.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Gaziantep City Hospital, Gaziantep 27100, Turkey.
Medicina (Kaunas). 2025 Apr 25;61(5):799. doi: 10.3390/medicina61050799.
: The aim of this study was to compare the short- and long-term effectiveness of ultrasound-guided percutaneous release (CTR-US) and mini-open surgery in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). : A retrospective analysis was conducted on 172 patients who underwent surgical treatment for CTS between 2015 and 2020. The patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent CTR-US (Group A, = 66) and those treated with mini-open surgery (Group B, = 106). All patients were evaluated using the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QDASH) scores before surgery and at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years postoperatively. Electrophysiological and ultrasound findings were also compared. Statistical analyses were performed using t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and Chi-square tests, with significance set at < 0.05. : A total of 172 patients who met the study criteria were included. Among the participants, 112 were women and 60 were men. The mean age was calculated as 61 years for female patients and 54 years for male patients. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of age, gender, laterality, and disease duration. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in BCTQ and QDASH scores at all postoperative time points compared to preoperative scores ( < 0.001). The CTR-US group showed advantages in shorter treatment duration ( < 0.001), lower cost ( < 0.05), and faster recovery time. Electrophysiological evaluations revealed faster improvements in distal motor latency (DML) and sensory conduction velocity (SCV) in the CTR-US group ( < 0.05). Ultrasound assessments indicated that both methods achieved effective release of the transverse carpal ligament. No significant differences were observed between the groups in long-term questionnaire scores. : CTR-US offers advantages such as shorter treatment duration, lower cost, and faster recovery due to its minimally invasive nature. Consistent with the literature, CTR-US provided faster recovery and improved patient comfort. However, mini-open surgery remains a reliable alternative with long-term symptom control and low complication rates. Our study found that both methods are effective, but CTR-US stands out for its esthetic and functional advantages.
本研究的目的是比较超声引导下经皮松解术（CTR-US）和小切口手术治疗腕管综合征（CTS）的短期和长期疗效。
对2015年至2020年间接受CTS手术治疗的172例患者进行回顾性分析。患者分为两组：接受CTR-US治疗的患者（A组，n = 66）和接受小切口手术治疗的患者（B组，n = 106）。所有患者在手术前以及术后3个月、6个月、1年、2年和5年时使用波士顿腕管问卷（BCTQ）和手臂、肩部和手部快速残疾评定量表（QDASH）进行评估。还比较了电生理和超声检查结果。采用t检验、曼-惠特尼U检验和卡方检验进行统计分析，显著性水平设定为P < 0.05。
共有172例符合研究标准的患者纳入研究。参与者中，女性112例，男性60例。女性患者的平均年龄计算为61岁，男性患者为54岁。两组在年龄、性别、患侧和病程方面无显著差异。与术前评分相比，两组在所有术后时间点的BCTQ和QDASH评分均有显著改善（P < 0.001）。CTR-US组在治疗时间较短（P < 0.001）、成本较低（P < 0.05）和恢复时间较快方面具有优势。电生理评估显示CTR-US组的远端运动潜伏期（DML）和感觉传导速度（SCV）改善更快（P < 0.05）。超声评估表明两种方法均实现了腕横韧带的有效松解。两组长期问卷评分无显著差异。
CTR-US因其微创性质具有治疗时间短、成本低和恢复快等优势。与文献一致，CTR-US恢复更快，患者舒适度更高。然而，小切口手术仍然是一种可靠的选择，具有长期症状控制和低并发症发生率。我们的研究发现两种方法均有效，但CTR-US因其美学和功能优势而脱颖而出。
