Recurrent Cubital Tunnel Syndrome. Etiology and Treatment

R. Filippi, P. Charalampaki, R. Reisch, D. Koch, P. Grunert
{"title":"Recurrent Cubital Tunnel Syndrome. Etiology and Treatment","authors":"R. Filippi, P. Charalampaki, R. Reisch, D. Koch, P. Grunert","doi":"10.1055/s-2001-19937","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Controversy surrounds the treatment of recurrent cubital tunnel syndrome after previous surgery. Irrespective of the surgical technique, namely pure decompression in the ulnar groove and the cubital tunnel distal of the medial epicondyle, and the different methods of volar transposition (subcutaneous, intramuscular, and submuscular), the results of surgical therapy of cubital tunnel syndrome are often not favorable, especially in cases of long-standing symptoms and severe deficits. Twenty-two patients who had previously undergone surgical treatment for ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow were evaluated because of persistent or recurrent pain, paresthesia, numbness, and motor weakness. Ten patients had undergone a nerve transposition, 5 patients underwent a simple decompression of the ulnar nerve, and 7 patients experienced two previous operations with different surgical techniques. Two patients underwent surgery at our hospital, whereas 20 patients underwent their primary surgery at other institutions. Various surgical techniques were used during the subsequent surgery, such as external neurolysis, subcutaneous anterior transposition, and subsequent transfer of the nerve back into the sulcus. The causes of continued or recurrent symptoms after initial surgery included dense perineural fibrosis of the nerve after subcutaneous transposition, adhesions of the nerve to the medial epicondyle and retention of the medial intermuscular septum. The average follow-up after the last procedure was 7 months (2 - 20 months). All 7 patients with subsequent transfer of the ulnar nerve back into the sulcus became pain-free, whereas only 11 of 15 patients who had external neurolysis or subcutaneous transposition became free of pain or experienced reduced pain. The recovery of motor function and return of sensibility were variable and unpredictable. In summary, reoperation after primary surgery of cubital tunnel syndrome gave satisfactory results in 18 of 22 cases. Subsequent transfer of the ulnar nerve back into the sulcus promises to be useful in cases in which subcutaneous transposition had not been successful.","PeriodicalId":49808,"journal":{"name":"Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery","volume":"8 1","pages":"197 - 201"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"47","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2001-19937","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 47

Abstract

Controversy surrounds the treatment of recurrent cubital tunnel syndrome after previous surgery. Irrespective of the surgical technique, namely pure decompression in the ulnar groove and the cubital tunnel distal of the medial epicondyle, and the different methods of volar transposition (subcutaneous, intramuscular, and submuscular), the results of surgical therapy of cubital tunnel syndrome are often not favorable, especially in cases of long-standing symptoms and severe deficits. Twenty-two patients who had previously undergone surgical treatment for ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow were evaluated because of persistent or recurrent pain, paresthesia, numbness, and motor weakness. Ten patients had undergone a nerve transposition, 5 patients underwent a simple decompression of the ulnar nerve, and 7 patients experienced two previous operations with different surgical techniques. Two patients underwent surgery at our hospital, whereas 20 patients underwent their primary surgery at other institutions. Various surgical techniques were used during the subsequent surgery, such as external neurolysis, subcutaneous anterior transposition, and subsequent transfer of the nerve back into the sulcus. The causes of continued or recurrent symptoms after initial surgery included dense perineural fibrosis of the nerve after subcutaneous transposition, adhesions of the nerve to the medial epicondyle and retention of the medial intermuscular septum. The average follow-up after the last procedure was 7 months (2 - 20 months). All 7 patients with subsequent transfer of the ulnar nerve back into the sulcus became pain-free, whereas only 11 of 15 patients who had external neurolysis or subcutaneous transposition became free of pain or experienced reduced pain. The recovery of motor function and return of sensibility were variable and unpredictable. In summary, reoperation after primary surgery of cubital tunnel syndrome gave satisfactory results in 18 of 22 cases. Subsequent transfer of the ulnar nerve back into the sulcus promises to be useful in cases in which subcutaneous transposition had not been successful.
复发性肘管综合征。病因及治疗
既往手术后复发性肘管综合征的治疗存在争议。无论采用何种手术技术,即单纯的尺槽减压和内侧上髁远端肘管减压,以及掌侧转位的不同方法(皮下、肌内和肌下),手术治疗肘管综合征的结果往往不佳,特别是在症状长期存在和严重缺陷的情况下。22例因肘部尺神经卡压而接受手术治疗的患者因持续或复发性疼痛、感觉异常、麻木和运动无力而被评估。10例患者行神经移位术,5例患者行简单尺神经减压术,7例患者既往两次手术,手术技术不同。两名患者在我院接受了手术,而20名患者在其他机构接受了初次手术。在随后的手术中使用了各种手术技术,如外神经松解术、皮下前移位以及随后将神经转移回沟内。初次手术后持续或复发症状的原因包括皮下转位后神经周围致密纤维化、神经与内侧上髁粘连和内侧肌间隔保留。末次手术后平均随访7个月(2 ~ 20个月)。所有7例随后将尺神经转移回沟的患者均无疼痛,而15例进行外神经松解或皮下转位的患者中只有11例无疼痛或疼痛减轻。运动功能的恢复和感觉的恢复是可变的和不可预测的。总结,22例肘管综合征初次手术后再手术18例获得满意结果。随后将尺神经转移回沟中,在皮下转位未成功的情况下是有用的。
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
Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery
Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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