Introduction: Carpal tunnel syndrome is the most prevalent form of nerve compression syndrome of the upper limb; therefore, it is of clinical significance to critique treatment methods. There is an ongoing debate amongst clinicians as to which surgical method-open or endoscopic carpal tunnel release-provides better overall symptom relief and faster recovery time. This systematic review aimed to investigate the evidence from randomised control trials to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of open and endoscopic carpal tunnel release surgery.
Methods: Database searches were carried out to identify literature. An inclusion and exclusion criteria was applied to only include randomised control trials which compared open and endoscopic surgery. Publications were then selected according to PRISMA guidelines, risk of bias was assessed and patient outcome was assessed.
Results: Twenty-three studies were selected for this systematic review. It was found that for improvement to grip strength and symptom severity, the endoscopic group had more significant improvement in the short term, resulting in a quicker return to work time compared to the open group. The complication rate for both intervention groups was low despite more severe and irreversible complications such as prolonged pain and wound infections being observed in the open group; however, the endoscopic group reported a higher risk of needing repeat surgery.
Conclusion: The quicker recovery time, improved cosmetic result and less severe complications observed with the endoscopic technique suggest that it should be used more often. However, this review found no convincing evidence of a significantly superior technique in the long term.
Keywords: Carpal tunnel syndrome; Endoscopic carpal tunnel release; Minimally invasive surgery; Open carpal tunnel release; Open versus endoscopic surgery; Patient outcomes.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.