Abstract
Cubital tunnel syndrome is a symptomatic ulnar nerve dysfunction at the elbow region probably caused by a combination of compression, traction and friction. Static and dynamic factors are involved, leading to ischemia or mechanical compression, secondary to repeated elbow flexion, anatomic variants of muscles and ulnar nerve subluxation. It is the second most common form of nerve entrapment after carpal tunnel syndrome [1]. Several surgical techniques exist for treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome. Endoscopic cubital tunnel release has been reported as a promising minimally invasive technique. This chapter aims to compare outcomes and complications of open cubital tunnel release (OCTR) and endoscopic tunnel release (ECTR) in the treatment of idiopathic cubital tunnel syndrome. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed. Studies including adults with idiopathic cubital tunnel treated exclusively by ECTR or OCTR were included. Outcomes of interest were postoperative clinical outcome, satisfaction, pain, ability to work and complications. Postoperative clinical outcomes were dichotomized into 2 categories: improved or not improved. Results: 6 studies met the inclusion criteria (1 RCT and 5 observational), representing 156 open and 247 endoscopic decompressions. In the open group, 79% experienced improvement of clinical symptoms with 16% complication rate. In the endoscopic group, 86% experienced clinical improvement with 8% complication rate. No statistical significant differences were found for satisfaction and pain scores and ability to work. Conclusions: This review demonstrates similar effectiveness between the endoscopic (ECTR) and open (OCTR) techniques for treatment of idiopathic cubital tunnel syndrome with similar clinical outcomes and complication profiles. Keywords: compression neuropathy, cubital tunnel, endoscopic, ulnar nerve.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Mondelli M, Giannini F, Ballerini M, Ginanneschi F, Martorelli E. Incidence of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow in the province of Siena (Italy). J Neurol Sci. 2005;234:5–10.
Boone S, Gelberman RH, Calfee RP. The management of cubital tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am. 2015;40:1897–1904; quiz 1904.
Mondelli M, Giannini F, Morana P, Rossi S. Ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: predictive value of clinical and electrophysiological measurements for surgical outcomes. Electromyogr Clin Neurphysiol. 2004;44:349–56.
Dellon L, Chang E, Coert JH, Campbell KR. Intraneural ulnar nerve pressure changes related to operative techniques for cubital tunnel decompression. J Hand Surg Am. 1994;19(6):923–30.
Dellon L. Review of treatment results of for ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow. J Hand Surg Am. 1989;14A:688–700.
McGowan A. The results of transposition of the ulnar nerve for traumatic ulnar neuritis. J Bone Joint Surg. 1950;32B(3):293–9.
Dellon L. Diagnosis and treatment of ulnar nerve compression at the elbow. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg. 2000;4(2):127–36.
Caliandro P, La Torre G, Padua R, Giannini F, Padua L. Treatment for ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(7):CD006839.
Dutch Guideline for treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome: richtlijn neuropathie van de nervus ulnaris bij de elleboog, 2011 door Nederlandse Vereniging van Neurologie in samenwerking met de Nederlandse Vereniging voor plastiche Chirurgie en Nederlandse Vereniging voor Neurochirurgie (pp. 0–88).
Tsai T, Chen I, Majd M, Lim B. Cubital tunnel release with endoscopic assistance: results of a new technique. J Hand Surg Am. 1999;24:21–9.
Hoffmann R, Siemionow M. The endoscopic management of cubital tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br. 2006;31:23–9.
Dellon L, MacKinnon S. Injury to the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve during cubital tunnel surgery. J Hand Surg Br. 1985;10:33–6.
Ren Y, Zhou X, Qiao H, Wei Z, Fan B, Lin W, et al. Open versus endoscopic in situ decompression in cubital tunnel syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Surg. 2016;35:104–10.
Buchanan P, Chieng L, Hubbard Z, Law T, Chim H. Endoscopic versus open in situ cubital tunnel release: a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of 655 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;141(3):679–84.
Furlan A, Malmivaara A, Chou R, Maher C, Deyo R, Schoene M, et al. 2015 updated method guideline for systematic reviews in the cochrane back and neck group. Spine. 2015;40(21):1660–73.
Neumann I, Santesso N, Akl E, Rind D, Vandvik P, Alonso-Coello P, et al. A guide for health professionals to interpretet and use recommendations in guidelines developed with the GRADE approach. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;72:45–55.
Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, Tugwell P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analysis. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; 2000.
Watts A, Bain G. Patient-rated outcome of ulnar nerve decompression: a comparison of endoscopic and open in situ decompression. J Hand Surg Am. 2009;34:1492–8.
Saint-Cyr M, Lakhiany C, Tsai T. Surgical management of cubital tunnel syndrome: a comparative analysis of outcome using four different techniques. Eur J Plast Surg. 2013;36:693–700.
Dützmann S, Martin K, Sobottka S, et al. Open vs retractor-endoscopic in situ decompression of the ulnar nerve in cubital tunnel syndrome: a retrospective cohort study. Neurosurgery. 2013;72:605–16; discussion 614–616
Bolster M, Zöphel O, van den Heuvel E, Ruettermann M. Cubital tunnel syndrome: a comparison of an endoscopic technique with a minimal invasive open technique. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2014;39:621–5.
Bacle G, Marteau E, Freslon M, et al. Cubital tunnel syndrome: comparative results of a multicenter study of 4 surgical techniques with a mean follow-up of 92 months. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014;100(Suppl):S205–8.
Schmidt S, Kleist Welch-Guerra W, Matthes M, Baldauf J, Schminke U, Schroeder H. Endoscopic vs open decompression of the ulnar nerve in cubital tunnel syndrome: a prospective randomized double-blind study. Neurosurgery. 2015;77:960–70; discussion 970–1.
Race C, Saldana M. Anatomic course of the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve during cubital tunnel surgery. J Hand Surg. 1991;16:48–52.
Lowe J, Maggi S, Mackinnon S. The position of crossing branches of the medial antebrachial cutaneous nerve during cubital tunnel surgery in humans. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114:692–6.
Mirza A, Mirza J, Lee B, et al. An anatomical basis for endoscopic cubital tunnel release and associated clinical outcome. J Hand Surg Am. 2014;39:1363–9.
Oertel J, Keiner D, Gaab M. Endoscopic decompression of the ulnar nerve at the elbow. Neurosurgery. 2010;66:817–24; discussion 824.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van der Heijden, B.E.P.A., Coert, H.J. (2019). Open Versus Endoscopische Cubital Tunnel Release. In: Bartels, R., Rovers, M., Westert, G. (eds) Evidence for Neurosurgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16323-5_20
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16323-5_20
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16322-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16323-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)