Comparison Of Clinical Efficacy Between Traditional Incision And Small Incision For Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Treatment

Background Carpal tunnel syndrome is one of the main diseases that seriously affect people’s work and life,in addition,the incidence is increasing year by year.Although there are many surgical options for the treatment of this disease,there is still no conclusion on which surgical option should be used for patients with carpal tunnel syndrome of different severity.Objective By comparing the efficacy of Open carpal tunnel release and Small incision carpal tunnel release for the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome with mild or severe nerve injury,we can provide a new idea for how to choose the operation scheme of carpal tunnel syndrome.Methods A total of 80 patients with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome were included in this study.All patients were divided into two groups according to the average FA value:severe group(FA≤0.42)(group A)and mild group(FA>0.42)(group B).Then group A and B were randomly divided into A1,A2 and B1,B2 subgroups.Open carpal tunnel release were performed in group A1 and B1,and Small incision carpal tunnel release was performed in group A2 and B2.We analyzed the relief of symptoms and function of the patients by comparing the changes of Boston carpal tunnel score(BTCQ)before and after operation.SPSS19.0statistical software was used to determine whether there was a statistical difference in the curative effect between the two methods.The data were expressed by x±s,and the t-test was used to compare the mean between the two groups;the counting data rate was analyzed byχ~2 test.p<0.05 was statistically significant.Results After three months of follow-up,the symptoms and function of all patients were improved.(1)The mean Boston carpal tunnel score(ΔBCTQ)of A1 group was24.850±4.269,the meanΔBCTQ of A2 group was 21.250±2.188.The effects of the two groups are significantly different(p<0.05);(2)The mean symptom score of A1 group was 16.500±2.037,the meanΔSSS of A2 group was 14.150±1.558.The effects of the two groups are significantly different(p<0.05);(3)The averageΔFSS in A1 group was 8.350±2.971,the averageΔFSS in A2group was 7.100±2.022.There is no significant difference between the effects of the two subgroups(p>0.05);(4)The meanΔBCTQ in B1 group was 15.050±1.465,the meanΔBCTQ in B2 group was 14.550±1.962.There is no significant difference between the effects of the two subgroups(p>0.05);(5)The meanΔSSS in B1 group was 8.000±2.702,the meanΔSSS in B2group was 8.250±2.385.There is no significant difference between the effects of the two subgroups(p>0.05);(6).The meanΔFSS in B1 group was 7.050±1.987,and the meanΔFSS in B2group was 6.300±1.520.There is no significant difference between the effects of the two subgroups(p>0.05);(7)Two patients had postoperative scar pain and one patient had palmar sensory disturbance in the patients who underwent traditional incision surgery.None of the patients in the small incision group had the above complications.Conclusion For the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome with severe median nerve injury,traditional incision is better than small incision.For the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome with mild median nerve injury,there is no significant difference between the two methods in improving symptoms and function.