Medial Epicondylectomy With Adipofascial Flap Versus Anterior Subcutaneous Transposition in Surgical Treatment of Cubital Tunnel Syndrome.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Tarik Mujadzic, Julia Bian, Carlos Martinez, Mirza M Mujadzic, Hata Botonjic, H I Friedman, Mirsad Mujadzic
{"title":"Medial Epicondylectomy With Adipofascial Flap Versus Anterior Subcutaneous Transposition in Surgical Treatment of Cubital Tunnel Syndrome.","authors":"Tarik Mujadzic, Julia Bian, Carlos Martinez, Mirza M Mujadzic, Hata Botonjic, H I Friedman, Mirsad Mujadzic","doi":"10.1097/SAP.0000000000004382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cubital tunnel syndrome, the second most common compression neuropathy of the upper extremity, has several surgical treatment options including simple (in situ) decompression, decompression with medial epicondylectomy (ME), or anterior transposition to a subcutaneous, submuscular, or subfascial position. The existing literature does not clearly establish the superiority of one procedure over the other. This study aims to compare two techniques, ME combined with an adipofascial flap versus anterior subcutaneous transposition, in terms of outcomes including resolution of neurological deficits, surgical site discomfort, recurrence, and reoperation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was an IRB-approved retrospective chart analysis on patients who had primary ulnar nerve decompression via either ME or subcutaneous anterior transposition. Outcomes recorded were tenderness at operative site, resolution of neurological deficits, recurrence rate, and need for secondary surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients undergoing ME (n = 48) were classified into mild (n = 1, 2%), moderate (n = 11, 23%), and severe (n = 36, 75%) categories. For this group, complete resolution of neurological symptoms was recorded as <6 weeks (n = 10, 21%), 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 8, 16.6%), and >3 months (n = 13, 27%). Incomplete resolution was documented as improved (n = 15, 31.2%), unchanged (n = 2, 4.1%), or worse (0%). Surgical site discomfort was documented as lasting <3 weeks (n = 30, 62.5%), 3 to 6 weeks (n = 15, 37.5%), and 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 3, 6.3%), and there were no patients who had unresolved pain. The recurrence rate was 2/48 (4.1%). The secondary surgery rate was 1/48 (2%).Patients undergoing subcutaneous anterior transposition (n = 54) were classified into mild (n = 6, 11%), moderate (n = 26, 48%), and severe (n = 22, 41%) categories. For this group, complete resolution of symptoms was recorded as <6 weeks in (n = 13, 24%), 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 10, 18.5%), and >3 months (n = 12, 22.2%). Incomplete resolution was documented as improved (n = 13, 24.1%), unchanged (n = 4, 7.4%), or worse (n = 2, 3.7%). Surgical site discomfort was documented as lasting <3 weeks (n = 41, 76%), 3 to 6 weeks (n = 2, 4%), and 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 1, 2%), and 10 patients (18%) had unresolved pain. The recurrence rate (n = 13, 24%) and need for a second surgery (n = 19, 18.5%) were also recorded.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Medial epicondylectomy with adipofascial flap is effective in treating cubital tunnel syndrome and has a lower potential for persistent surgical site pain and recurrence than subcutaneous transposition.</p>","PeriodicalId":8060,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","volume":"94 6S Suppl 4","pages":"S526-S530"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000004382","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Cubital tunnel syndrome, the second most common compression neuropathy of the upper extremity, has several surgical treatment options including simple (in situ) decompression, decompression with medial epicondylectomy (ME), or anterior transposition to a subcutaneous, submuscular, or subfascial position. The existing literature does not clearly establish the superiority of one procedure over the other. This study aims to compare two techniques, ME combined with an adipofascial flap versus anterior subcutaneous transposition, in terms of outcomes including resolution of neurological deficits, surgical site discomfort, recurrence, and reoperation.

Methods: This was an IRB-approved retrospective chart analysis on patients who had primary ulnar nerve decompression via either ME or subcutaneous anterior transposition. Outcomes recorded were tenderness at operative site, resolution of neurological deficits, recurrence rate, and need for secondary surgery.

Results: Patients undergoing ME (n = 48) were classified into mild (n = 1, 2%), moderate (n = 11, 23%), and severe (n = 36, 75%) categories. For this group, complete resolution of neurological symptoms was recorded as <6 weeks (n = 10, 21%), 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 8, 16.6%), and >3 months (n = 13, 27%). Incomplete resolution was documented as improved (n = 15, 31.2%), unchanged (n = 2, 4.1%), or worse (0%). Surgical site discomfort was documented as lasting <3 weeks (n = 30, 62.5%), 3 to 6 weeks (n = 15, 37.5%), and 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 3, 6.3%), and there were no patients who had unresolved pain. The recurrence rate was 2/48 (4.1%). The secondary surgery rate was 1/48 (2%).Patients undergoing subcutaneous anterior transposition (n = 54) were classified into mild (n = 6, 11%), moderate (n = 26, 48%), and severe (n = 22, 41%) categories. For this group, complete resolution of symptoms was recorded as <6 weeks in (n = 13, 24%), 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 10, 18.5%), and >3 months (n = 12, 22.2%). Incomplete resolution was documented as improved (n = 13, 24.1%), unchanged (n = 4, 7.4%), or worse (n = 2, 3.7%). Surgical site discomfort was documented as lasting <3 weeks (n = 41, 76%), 3 to 6 weeks (n = 2, 4%), and 6 weeks to 3 months (n = 1, 2%), and 10 patients (18%) had unresolved pain. The recurrence rate (n = 13, 24%) and need for a second surgery (n = 19, 18.5%) were also recorded.

Conclusions: Medial epicondylectomy with adipofascial flap is effective in treating cubital tunnel syndrome and has a lower potential for persistent surgical site pain and recurrence than subcutaneous transposition.

脂肪筋膜瓣内侧上髁切除术与前皮下转位治疗肘管综合征的比较。
背景:肘管综合征是上肢第二大最常见的压迫性神经病变,有几种手术治疗选择,包括简单(原位)减压、内侧上髁切除术(ME)减压或前移位到皮下、肌肉下或筋膜下位置。现有文献并没有明确地确立一种程序优于另一种程序。本研究的目的是比较两种技术,ME联合脂肪筋膜瓣与前皮下转位,在结果方面包括神经功能缺损的解决,手术部位不适,复发和再手术。方法:这是一项经irb批准的回顾性图表分析,分析了通过ME或皮下前移位进行初级尺神经减压的患者。记录的结果包括手术部位的压痛、神经功能缺损的消退、复发率和是否需要二次手术。结果:48例ME患者分为轻度(n = 1.2%)、中度(n = 11,23%)和重度(n = 36,75%)。在该组中,神经症状的完全缓解记录为3个月(n = 13.27%)。不完全解决被记录为改善(n = 15, 31.2%),不变(n = 2, 4.1%)或更差(0%)。手术部位不适持续3个月(n = 12, 22.2%)。不完全缓解被记录为改善(n = 13, 24.1%)、不变(n = 4, 7.4%)或更差(n = 2, 3.7%)。结论:内侧上髁切除术联合脂肪筋膜瓣是治疗肘管综合征的有效方法,与皮下转位相比,手术部位持续疼痛和复发的可能性更低。
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
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
13.30%
发文量
584
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The only independent journal devoted to general plastic and reconstructive surgery, Annals of Plastic Surgery serves as a forum for current scientific and clinical advances in the field and a sounding board for ideas and perspectives on its future. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original articles, brief communications, case reports, and notes in all areas of interest to the practicing plastic surgeon. There are also historical and current reviews, descriptions of surgical technique, and lively editorials and letters to the editor.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信