Endoscopic Versus Open In Situ Decompression for the Management of Cubital Tunnel

Abstract

This study compared the results of endoscopic cubital tunnel release (eCuTR) with those of open cubital tunnel release (oCuTR) for the management of cubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS). In this retrospective study, 35 patients underwent eCuTR or oCuTR. Group I and group II consisted of 16 patients undergoing eCuTR and 19 patients undergoing oCuTR, respectively. Patients were asked to report paresthesia and pain, and electromyography was performed. The Dellon and Bishop classifications were used. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were recorded, as well as the key pinch strength and two -point discrimination. The incision length and operation duration were noted. The mean follow-up was 39 months. The mean operating time was longer in the endoscopy group (43 vs 22 minutes). Overall, 34.3% (n=12) of the cases were classified as Dellon grade II and 65.7% (n=23) were classified as Dellon grade III. According to the Bishop score, excellent or good results were obtained for 75% of the patients in the eCuTR group and 78.9% of the patients in the oCuTR group. In the eCuTR and oCuTR groups, all outcome measures improved after surgery: DASH score (preoperative, 37.7 vs 30.7; postoperative, 15.4 vs 20), VAS score (preoperative, 7.8 vs 7.3; postoperative, 4.3 vs 4.1), pinch strength (preoperative, 74 vs 66; postoperative, 93 vs 84), and two -point discrimination (preoperative, 5.6 vs 6.6; postoperative, 4.9 vs 4.5). No significant difference was apparent between the two techniques in outcomes. However, the endoscopic release had a higher reoperation rate and took twice as long to perform despite having a shorter incision. [ Orthopedics . 2024;47(3):e119 -e124.]