Back to Search Start Over

Revision Carpal Tunnel Release Following Endoscopic Compared With Open Decompression.

Authors :
Ferrin PC
Sather BK
Krakauer K
Schweitzer TP
Lipira AB
Sood RF
Source :
JAMA network open [JAMA Netw Open] 2024 Jan 02; Vol. 7 (1), pp. e2352660. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Jan 02.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Importance: Carpal tunnel release (CTR) technique may influence the likelihood of revision surgery. Prior studies of revision CTR following endoscopic CTR (ECTR) compared with open CTR (OCTR) have been limited by sample size and duration of follow-up.<br />Objective: To estimate the incidence of revision CTR following ECTR compared with OCTR in a national cohort.<br />Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from the US Veterans Health Administration. Participants included all adults (age ≥18 years) undergoing at least 1 outpatient CTR from October 1, 1999, to May 20, 2021. Data were analyzed from May 21, 2021, to November 27, 2023.<br />Exposure: Index CTR technique.<br />Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was time to revision CTR, defined as repeat ipsilateral CTR during the study period. Secondary outcomes were indications for revision, findings during revision, and additional procedures performed during revision.<br />Results: Among 134 851 wrists from 103 455 patients (92 510 [89.4%] male; median [IQR] age, 62 [53-70] years) undergoing at least 1 CTR, 1809 wrists underwent at least 1 revision at a median (IQR) of 2.5 (1.0-3.8) years. In competing-risks analysis, the cumulative incidence of revision was 1.06% (95% CI, 0.99%-1.12%) at 5 years and 1.59% (95% CI, 1.51%-1.67%) at 10 years. ECTR was associated with increased hazard of revision CTR compared with OCTR (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.56; 95% CI, 1.34-1.81; P < .001). The risk difference for revision CTR associated with ECTR compared with OCTR was 0.57% (95% CI, 0.31%-0.84%) at 5 years (number needed to harm, 176) and 0.72% (95% CI, 0.36%-1.07%) at 10 years (number needed to harm, 139). Regardless of index CTR technique, the most common indication for revision was symptom recurrence (1062 wrists [58.7%]). A reconstituted transverse carpal ligament (TCL) was more common after ECTR compared with OCTR, whereas scarring of the overlying tissues and of the median nerve itself were more common following OCTR. Incomplete transverse-carpal-ligament release was observed in 251 of the wrists undergoing revision CTR (13.94%) and was more common among revisions following ECTR (odds ratio, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.11-2.37; P = .01).<br />Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of revision CTR in the Veterans Health Administration, ECTR was associated with increased risk of revision compared with OCTR, but the absolute risk was low regardless of technique. Intraoperative findings at revision varied significantly according to index CTR technique.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2574-3805
Volume :
7
Issue :
1
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
JAMA network open
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
38214927
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.52660