Carpal tunnel decompression in patients with normal nerve conduction studies

S. Mackenzie, O. Stone, P. Jenkins, N. Clement, I. Murray, A. Duckworth, J. McEachan
{"title":"Carpal tunnel decompression in patients with normal nerve conduction studies","authors":"S. Mackenzie, O. Stone, P. Jenkins, N. Clement, I. Murray, A. Duckworth, J. McEachan","doi":"10.1177/1753193419866646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Some patients present with typical clinical features of carpal tunnel syndrome despite normal nerve conduction studies. This study compared the preoperative and 1-year postoperative QuickDASH scores in patients with normal and abnormal nerve conduction studies, who underwent carpal tunnel decompression. Of the 637 patients included in the study, 19 had clinical features of carpal tunnel syndrome but normal nerve conduction studies, and underwent decompression after failure of conservative management. Preoperative QuickDASH scores were comparable in both groups (58 vs 54.8). However, there were significant differences between the normal and abnormal nerve conduction study groups in the QuickDASH at 1 year (34.9 vs 21.5) and change in QuickDASH postoperatively (23.1 vs 33.4). Patients with normal nerve conduction studies had comparable preoperative disability scores compared with those with abnormal studies. Although they had a significant improvement in QuickDASH at 1 year, this was significantly less than those with abnormal nerve conduction studies. Level of evidence: III","PeriodicalId":73762,"journal":{"name":"Journal of hand surgery (Edinburgh, Scotland)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1753193419866646","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of hand surgery (Edinburgh, Scotland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1753193419866646","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Some patients present with typical clinical features of carpal tunnel syndrome despite normal nerve conduction studies. This study compared the preoperative and 1-year postoperative QuickDASH scores in patients with normal and abnormal nerve conduction studies, who underwent carpal tunnel decompression. Of the 637 patients included in the study, 19 had clinical features of carpal tunnel syndrome but normal nerve conduction studies, and underwent decompression after failure of conservative management. Preoperative QuickDASH scores were comparable in both groups (58 vs 54.8). However, there were significant differences between the normal and abnormal nerve conduction study groups in the QuickDASH at 1 year (34.9 vs 21.5) and change in QuickDASH postoperatively (23.1 vs 33.4). Patients with normal nerve conduction studies had comparable preoperative disability scores compared with those with abnormal studies. Although they had a significant improvement in QuickDASH at 1 year, this was significantly less than those with abnormal nerve conduction studies. Level of evidence: III
腕管减压对正常神经传导患者的研究
尽管神经传导检查正常,一些患者仍表现出典型的腕管综合征的临床特征。本研究比较了行腕管减压术的正常和异常神经传导患者术前和术后1年的QuickDASH评分。在纳入研究的637例患者中,19例具有腕管综合征的临床特征,但神经传导研究正常,在保守治疗失败后接受了减压。两组术前QuickDASH评分具有可比性(58比54.8)。然而,正常和异常神经传导研究组在1年时的QuickDASH (34.9 vs 21.5)和术后QuickDASH的变化(23.1 vs 33.4)之间存在显著差异。神经传导研究正常的患者与研究异常的患者相比,术前残疾评分相当。尽管他们在1年后的QuickDASH有了显著的改善,但这明显低于神经传导异常的患者。证据水平:III
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信