Diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome with ultrasound: should we go more distal?

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Tomás Fontes, Alexandre Sepriano, Sofia Ramiro, Paula Moniz, Carolina Furtado, Guilherme Figueiredo, Sandra Falcão
{"title":"Diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome with ultrasound: should we go more distal?","authors":"Tomás Fontes, Alexandre Sepriano, Sofia Ramiro, Paula Moniz, Carolina Furtado, Guilherme Figueiredo, Sandra Falcão","doi":"10.1136/rmdopen-2025-005563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the value of adding the ultradistal level to other more thoroughly studied levels of the carpal tunnel when measuring the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the median nerve (MN) by ultrasound (US) in diagnosing patients with primary carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients clinically diagnosed with primary CTS and healthy controls were included. The MN-CSA was measured by US at three wrist levels: proximal, distal and ultradistal. The best cut-off to differentiate cases and controls was determined for the CSA and for the difference between levels of the same wrist. The performance of different definitions for US-CTS compared with the clinical diagnosis of CTS was evaluated: (1) CSA above cut-off at each level; (2) CSA-difference above cut-off at each level; (3) ≥1 level with CSA above cut-off and (4) ≥1 CSA-difference above cut-off. Definition 3, excluding the ultradistal level, and combinations of definitions were also tested.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 219 patients and 39 controls were included. The CSA was higher in patients (10.5-16.8 mm<sup>2</sup>) than controls (6.2-7.6 mm<sup>2</sup>). The difference between groups was maximal at the ultradistal level (right: 10.1 mm<sup>2</sup>; left: 8.3 mm<sup>2</sup>). The CSA cut-offs were 11 mm<sup>2</sup>, 9 mm<sup>2</sup> and 10 mm<sup>2</sup> at the right, and 10 mm<sup>2</sup>, 8 mm<sup>2</sup> and 10 mm<sup>2</sup> at the left, for the proximal, distal and ultradistal levels, respectively. Definition 3 yielded the best balance between sensitivity (98%) and specificity (95%) (right hand). Removing the ultradistal level from definition 3 decreased sensitivity to 90%, maintaining the same specificity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Adding the ultradistal level improves the performance of US for diagnosing CTS. We suggest adding it in clinical practice when investigating CTS.</p>","PeriodicalId":21396,"journal":{"name":"RMD Open","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12121607/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RMD Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2025-005563","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the value of adding the ultradistal level to other more thoroughly studied levels of the carpal tunnel when measuring the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the median nerve (MN) by ultrasound (US) in diagnosing patients with primary carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

Methods: Patients clinically diagnosed with primary CTS and healthy controls were included. The MN-CSA was measured by US at three wrist levels: proximal, distal and ultradistal. The best cut-off to differentiate cases and controls was determined for the CSA and for the difference between levels of the same wrist. The performance of different definitions for US-CTS compared with the clinical diagnosis of CTS was evaluated: (1) CSA above cut-off at each level; (2) CSA-difference above cut-off at each level; (3) ≥1 level with CSA above cut-off and (4) ≥1 CSA-difference above cut-off. Definition 3, excluding the ultradistal level, and combinations of definitions were also tested.

Results: In total, 219 patients and 39 controls were included. The CSA was higher in patients (10.5-16.8 mm2) than controls (6.2-7.6 mm2). The difference between groups was maximal at the ultradistal level (right: 10.1 mm2; left: 8.3 mm2). The CSA cut-offs were 11 mm2, 9 mm2 and 10 mm2 at the right, and 10 mm2, 8 mm2 and 10 mm2 at the left, for the proximal, distal and ultradistal levels, respectively. Definition 3 yielded the best balance between sensitivity (98%) and specificity (95%) (right hand). Removing the ultradistal level from definition 3 decreased sensitivity to 90%, maintaining the same specificity.

Conclusions: Adding the ultradistal level improves the performance of US for diagnosing CTS. We suggest adding it in clinical practice when investigating CTS.

超声诊断腕管综合征:我们是否应该走得更远?
目的:探讨超声测量正中神经横断面积(CSA)在诊断原发性腕管综合征(CTS)时,将超远端水平添加到其他更深入研究的腕管水平的价值。方法:纳入临床诊断为原发性CTS的患者和健康对照者。MN-CSA通过US测量三个腕关节水平:近端、远端和超远端。对于CSA和同一腕关节水平之间的差异,确定了区分病例和对照组的最佳截止值。比较不同定义的US-CTS与临床诊断CTS的表现:(1)CSA在各水平上均高于临界值;(2) csa -各水平截止点以上的差值;(3) CSA高于临界值≥1个水平;(4)CSA高于临界值≥1个水平。定义3,不包括超远端水平,以及定义的组合也进行了测试。结果:共纳入219例患者和39例对照组。患者的CSA (10.5-16.8 mm2)高于对照组(6.2-7.6 mm2)。组间差异在超远端水平最大(右:10.1 mm2;左:8.3 mm2)。CSA切点右侧为11 mm2、9 mm2和10 mm2,左侧为10 mm2、8 mm2和10 mm2,分别为近端、远端和超远端水平。定义3在灵敏度(98%)和特异性(95%)之间取得了最佳平衡(右手)。从定义3中去除超远端水平将敏感性降低至90%,保持相同的特异性。结论:增加超远端水平可提高超声诊断CTS的效能。我们建议在临床研究CTS时加入它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
RMD Open
RMD Open RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
205
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: RMD Open publishes high quality peer-reviewed original research covering the full spectrum of musculoskeletal disorders, rheumatism and connective tissue diseases, including osteoporosis, spine and rehabilitation. Clinical and epidemiological research, basic and translational medicine, interesting clinical cases, and smaller studies that add to the literature are all considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信