[Experiences with endoscopic carpal tunnel release].

Ch Buchli, D Scharplatz
{"title":"[Experiences with endoscopic carpal tunnel release].","authors":"Ch Buchli,&nbsp;D Scharplatz","doi":"10.1024/1023-9332.8.4.181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Between 1994 and 2000 122 open and endoscopic carpal tunnel releases were performed. 82 of them were analysed retrospectively with major interest in security and results of the endoscopic technique. 39 patients were treated with an open, 41 patients with an endoscopic carpal tunnel release (26 using the two portal technique, 17 using the single portal technique). No major irreversible complications were reported, regarding the outcome their were no significant differences. From the 39 patients with open carpal tunnel release nine had persistent complaints and one of them was reoperated because of an injury of the motoric branch of the median nerve. Eight patients out of 26 treated with the two portal technique still had complaints and one needed to be reoperated because of excessive fibrosis around the median nerve. From the 17 patients operated with the single portal technique five had persistent complaints but no reoperation was necessary. Our study showed similar findings regarding security and results using the three different operation methods. But there were no advantages for the endoscopic carpal tunnel release because of the more atraumatic procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":79425,"journal":{"name":"Swiss surgery = Schweizer Chirurgie = Chirurgie suisse = Chirurgia svizzera","volume":"8 4","pages":"181-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Swiss surgery = Schweizer Chirurgie = Chirurgie suisse = Chirurgia svizzera","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1024/1023-9332.8.4.181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Between 1994 and 2000 122 open and endoscopic carpal tunnel releases were performed. 82 of them were analysed retrospectively with major interest in security and results of the endoscopic technique. 39 patients were treated with an open, 41 patients with an endoscopic carpal tunnel release (26 using the two portal technique, 17 using the single portal technique). No major irreversible complications were reported, regarding the outcome their were no significant differences. From the 39 patients with open carpal tunnel release nine had persistent complaints and one of them was reoperated because of an injury of the motoric branch of the median nerve. Eight patients out of 26 treated with the two portal technique still had complaints and one needed to be reoperated because of excessive fibrosis around the median nerve. From the 17 patients operated with the single portal technique five had persistent complaints but no reoperation was necessary. Our study showed similar findings regarding security and results using the three different operation methods. But there were no advantages for the endoscopic carpal tunnel release because of the more atraumatic procedure.

内窥镜下腕管释放术的经验。
1994年至2000年间进行了122例切开和内窥镜下腕管松解术。回顾性分析其中82例,主要关注内镜技术的安全性和结果。39例采用切开腕管,41例采用内窥镜下腕管松解术(26例采用双门静脉技术,17例采用单门静脉技术)。两组无重大不可逆并发症,两组预后无显著差异。39例切开腕管松解术患者中,9例患者有持续性主诉,其中1例因正中神经运动支损伤再次手术。26例采用双门静脉技术治疗的患者中有8例仍有主诉,1例因正中神经周围过度纤维化需要再次手术。在17例采用单门静脉技术手术的患者中,有5例有持续的主诉,但无需再次手术。我们的研究表明,使用三种不同的操作方法,安全性和结果相似。但内窥镜下腕管松解术没有优势,因为它是一种非创伤性手术。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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