Elrosasy Amr, Hindawi Mahmoud Diaa, Najah Qasi, Abo Zeid Mohamed, Eldeeb Hatem, Ghalwash Asem Ahmed, Afifi Eslam, Bani-Salameh Abdallah, Almosilhy Nereen, Shahen Mohamed Ahmed, Monib Fatma Ahmed, Hawas Yousef, Raizah Abdullah, Alqahtani Turki Ahmed, El-Rosasy Mahmoud, Mohamad Rashad G
Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Faculty of Medicine, Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Neurosurg Rev. 2025 Jun 5;48(1):486. doi: 10.1007/s10143-025-03587-x.
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) is a common peripheral nerve entrapment disorder with a high global burden. Various surgical techniques have been developed to optimize symptom relief and minimize postoperative morbidity. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the relative efficacy and safety of different carpal tunnel release (CTR) procedures. We conducted a systematic review and NMA of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical CTR techniques. Outcomes included symptom severity, pain scores, functional status, patient-reported outcomes, operative time, and adverse events. Data were synthesized using the frequentist approach with the netmeta package in R. Confidence in network estimates was evaluated using the CINeMA framework. Thirty-two RCTs comprising 2,916 patients were included. One-port and two-port endoscopic CTR (ECTR) techniques demonstrated superior symptom relief compared to conventional open CTR (COCTR), particularly at three months (two-port ECTR: SMD = -4.47; 95% CI: -5.67 to -3.26). One-port ECTR consistently showed better functional outcomes across all timepoints, including improved grip (SMD = 1.37; 95% CI: 0.35 to 2.39) and pinch strength. Pain was significantly reduced with two-port ECTR at one and three months. Ultrasound-guided CTR (CTR-US) showed the highest patient satisfaction (OR = 6.89; 95% CI: 1.87 to 25.43) and a significantly shorter return-to-work duration. The double tunnels technique (DTT) had the lowest risk of adverse events (OR = 0.05; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.42). Operational time and scar tenderness were comparable across all techniques. Heterogeneity was generally low to moderate across outcomes, and CINeMA assessments indicated moderate to low confidence in several comparisons. Endoscopic techniques, particularly one- and two-port ECTR, offer superior outcomes in symptom severity and functional recovery compared to COCTR. CTR-US appears to maximize patient satisfaction and early return to work, while DTT is associated with the fewest complications. These findings can guide individualized, evidence-based treatment decisions in CTS surgery.
腕管综合征(CTS)是一种常见的周围神经卡压性疾病,全球负担较重。已开发出各种手术技术以优化症状缓解并将术后发病率降至最低。这项网状荟萃分析(NMA)旨在比较不同腕管松解术(CTR)的相对疗效和安全性。我们对比较手术CTR技术的随机对照试验(RCT)进行了系统评价和NMA。结局指标包括症状严重程度、疼痛评分、功能状态、患者报告结局、手术时间和不良事件。使用R语言中的netmeta包采用频率学派方法对数据进行综合分析。使用CINeMA框架评估对网状估计值的置信度。纳入了32项RCT,共2916例患者。与传统开放性CTR(COCTR)相比,单端口和双端口内镜CTR(ECTR)技术在症状缓解方面表现更优,尤其是在术后三个月时(双端口ECTR:标准化均数差= -4.47;95%置信区间:-5.67至-3.26)。单端口ECTR在所有时间点均始终显示出更好的功能结局,包括握力改善(标准化均数差= 1.37;95%置信区间:0.35至2.39)和捏力增强。双端口ECTR在术后1个月和3个月时疼痛明显减轻。超声引导下CTR(CTR-US)显示患者满意度最高(比值比= 6.89;95%置信区间:1.87至25.43),且恢复工作的持续时间明显缩短。双隧道技术(DTT)的不良事件风险最低(比值比= 0.05;95%置信区间:0.01至0.42)。所有技术的手术时间和瘢痕压痛相当。各结局指标的异质性总体为低到中度,CINeMA评估表明在一些比较中的置信度为中度到低度。与COCTR相比,内镜技术,尤其是单端口和双端口ECTR,在症状严重程度和功能恢复方面具有更优结局。CTR-US似乎能使患者满意度最大化并能早期恢复工作,而DTT的并发症最少。这些研究结果可为CTS手术中基于证据的个体化治疗决策提供指导。