Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_574_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Foreword
- •Preface
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •Part I: Introduction
- •Part II: Basic Techniques
- •Part III: Minimally Invasive Techniques in the Phalanges and Metacarpals
- •Part IV: Minimally Invasive Procedures of the Carpus
- •Part V: Minimally Invasive Procedures for Distal Radius Fracture Fixation
- •Part VI(A): Wrist and Hand Arthroscopy – Traumatic
- •Part VI(B): Wrist and Hand Arthroscopy – Reconstruction
- •Part VII: Nerve Compression
- •Part VIII: Tendons and Soft Tissues
- •Index


Part VII: Nerve Compression
35
Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: The Single-Portal
Mirza Technique
Tamara D. Rozental, Charles S. Day,and Orrin I. Franko
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Massachusetts, U.S.A.
&
INTRODUCTION
Carpal tunnel syndromeisthe most common compression
neuropathy in the upper extremity.Patients failing conservative
treatment with splinting and/or corticosteroid injection often
require surgical release to alleviate the paresthesias and numbness whichcharacte rize the disease. The firstcarpal tunnel
release was performed in 1924 by Herbert Galloway (1). Since
then, avariety of incisions have been described to visualize
the transverse carpal ligament (TCL) and avoid injury to the
underlying median nerve. Open carpal tunnel release continues
to be the gold standard for decompression of the median nerve
but reports of pillar pain and prolonged discomfort over the
palmar incision have led to the development of endoscopic
techniques.There are twomainendoscopicapproachesfor
carpal tunnel release: single- or double-portal techniques. This
chapter reviewsendoscopic carpal tunnel release through the
Mirza single-portal distal entry technique. This uniportal techniquewas developedafter reports of injuries to anatomic
structuresatthe distal aspect of the TCL and allows direct
visualization of the superficial palmar arch, median nerve, and
flexor tendons (2).
&
INDICATIONS
The indications for the Mirza carpal tunnel release technique
are generally the same as those open carpal tunnel surgery.
They include aclinical diagnosis of median nerve compression
at the carpal tunnel in patients (1) failing conservative treatment
or (2) with thenar weakness or atrophy.
Authors disagree on absolute contraindications to endoscopic carpal tunnel release. Reported contraindications to date
include:
&
Need for extensive neurolysis or tenosynovectomy
&
Mass in the carpal canal
&
Inflammatory arthritis (due to increased risk of aggravating
the inflammatory process)
&
Peripheral neuropathy
&
Anatomic abnormalities
&
Vasospastic disorders
&
Prior carpal tunnel release
&
Thenar weakness requiring tendon transfer
&
Pregnancy (due to excessive weight gain and edema)
&
Dupuytren’s contracture or other conditions limiting finger
or wrist extension
&
Patients on anticoagulant therapy.
&
CONSIDERATIONS FOR PREOPERATIVE PLANNING
See discussion in Chapter 36.
&
SURGICAL TECHNIQUE
&
Positioning
The patient is positioned supine with the wrist in neutral
position. Twoinitial lines of incisions are drawn: one longitudinal in linewith thethird web spaceand theother
transversely across the radially abducted thumb. A1.5 cm
incision is marked from the intersection of these two lines
proximally.Anadditional marker for the incision is the ulnar
border of the flexed ring finger which should lie within the
1.5 cm incision. Tw oadditional longitudinal lines are drawn
in the distal forearm: one radial to the flexor carpi ulnaris
tendon and the other along the palmaris longus tendon. The
midpoint between these lines is marked with an “x” to aim
the cannula between the median and ulnar neurovascular
bundles (Fig. 1).
&
Technique
The skin is incised and the edges are undermined. ARagnell
retractor is placed on either side of the incision and the skin
edges are retracted, pulling the palmar fascia away from the
underlying neurovascularbundle. The palmar fascia is divided
longitudinally to expose the midpalmar fat. The median nerve,
superficial palmar arch, and TCL are then identified (Fig. 2).
The retractors are repositioned to include the palmar fascia.
Apathisthencreated by bluntdissection(with ablunt
hemostat)between theTCL andthe contentsofthe carpal
canal, aiming ulnarly towards the “x” in the distal forearm.
The forearmisthen elevated and the wrist extended over a
bolster to introduce the dissector (A.M. Surgical,Smithtown,
NewYork).The dissectorisaimedbetweenthe twolines
marked on the forearm. Once the pathway is createdwith the
dissector,adissecting obturator is introduced (Fig. 3). The tip
of the obturator should rest against the undersurface of the TCL
at all times. Once the cannula tip is palpable through the skin
beneath the “x”, the obturator is removed and the cannula is left
in place with the slot facing slightly ulnar.Astandard 4mm30 8
endoscope is introducedthrough theslott ed cannulaand
oriented toward the slot (Fig. 4A,B). The TCL is visualized
through the endoscope and any remaining tenosynovium is
removed with the dissecting obturator (Fig. 5). The median
nerve is visualized by rotating the cannula radially (Fig. 6).

Once propercannula placement is verified, the cannula is once
againrotated ulnarly to visualize the TCL andthe flexor
tendons (Fig. 7). Once aclear view of the TCL is obtained, the
endoscope is removed and amounting blade is attached to the
end of the scope with alocking device (Fig. 8). The TCL is
dividedbyadvancing theblade underdirect endoscopic
visualization throughthe cannulafromdistaltoproximal
(Fig. 9A,B). The TCL division is complete when the blade is
palpable through the skin in the distal forearm, proximal to the
wrist flexion crease. The blade can then be removed and the
endoscope reinserted to visualize the divided edges of the TCL
(Fig. 10). The median nerve and flexor tendons can also be
visualized by rotating the cannula radially and ulnarly,respectively. Finally, theendoscopeisremoved andthe obturator
re-inserted. The entire assembly is then brought out together.
&
Closure
Following irrigati on and hemostasis, the skin is closedwith
interrupted sutures. Asoft compressive dressing is then applied.
&
OUTCOMES AND RESULTS
Since the introduction of endoscopic carpal tunnel release, the
hand surgery literaturehas seen the proliferation of articles
reporting on the results, outcomes, and complications of the
technique. Enthusiasts emphasizelower postoperative
morbidity,better functional outcomes in the short term, and a
reduced period of disability.Opponents have focused on the
higher rates of complications encountered with the endoscopic
technique,particularlyinits early stages.Mirza initially
reported on 280 cases of endoscopic releases using the above
described technique. Mean grip strength approached preoperativevalue sbythe fourthpostoperativeweek andpatients
returned to work at amean of 14 days after surgery.Nopatients
reported pillar pain or scar tenderness (2).
Multiple prospective randomized trials comparing open
with endoscopiccarpaltunnelrelease havesince been
performed. Trumble et al. performed amulticenter randomized
trial using the single-portal Agee technique and atraditional
open carpal tunnel release (3). They found that patients treated
with the endoscopic release had better functional outcomes in
the first three months after surgery and returned to work at a
faster rate. These findings, however,have not been consistent
throughout theliterature.Other randomizedtrials have
reported similar outcomes and return to work times in both
patient groups (4,5). In addition, some series have reported
higher rates of reoperation in patients treated with endoscopic
carpal tunnel release, negating the positive effect of afaster
return to activities of dailyliving. Ameta-analysis of 13
randomized controlled trials was published in 2004 (6). The
study supported the conclusion that scar tenderness and grip
strength were better in patients treated with endoscopic techniques. They also found ahigher rate of reversible nerve injuries
among these patients. The results in terms of pain and return to
work wereinconclusive (6). To date, no randomized studies
have been published comparing the Mirza technique with open
carpal tunnel release.
&
COMPLICATIONS
Reported complication rates using the endoscopic technique
range from 0.2% to 5% (7). Many of themoredramatic
complications, however,occurred during the early development stages of thetechnique andhavebeenaddressed by
changes in the design of the instrumentation.
The original Agee technique resulted in several cases of
nerve transection (8). Since then, the blade assembly has been
redesigned and alargemulticenter trial using the new device
found acomplicationrateof1.8%(9).Due to incomplete
visualization of the TCL, Chow modified his original transbursal techniquetoanextrabursalinsertionpoint.Nagle
compared the two methods and found that the complication
rate of 11%using the original technique dropped to 2.2% once
the new insertion point was utilized (10).
Injury to anatomic structures at the distal aspect of the
TCL lead Mirza to develop auniportal technique allowing
direct visualization of the superficial palmar arch, median
nerve, and flexor tendons. During his early experience, Mirza
reported two cases of transient ulnar nerve neuropraxia. In
addition, one patient sustained apartial transaction of the
median nerve repaired at the time of surgery and the other
patienthad an incomplete releas eofthe TCLrequiring
reoperation. After redesigning the instrumentation, amore
recentreport of 475patientsrevealedone case of reflex
sympathetic dystrophy,one transient neuropraxia, and one
blade failure (11).
There arevarying reports in theliterature regarding
conversion of endoscopic carpaltunnelrelease to open
procedures. Saw et al. reported a12% conversion rate secondary
to fogging of the lens during the procedure and incomplete
visualization of the TCL (8). Other authors have reported a
conversion rate of 2% (Mirza).
FIGURE 1 The 1.5 cm incision is marked and two additional longitudinal lines are drawn in the distal forearm. The midpoint between these
lines is marked with an “x” to aim the cannula between the median and
ulnar neurovascular bundles.
276
&
Rozental et al.

FIGURE 2 Following skin incision, the skin edges are retracted, pulling the palmar fascia away from the
underlying neurovascular bundle. Themediannerve ( asterisk), superficial palmar arch ( white arrow)and
transverse carpal ligament ( black arrow)are then identified.
FIGURE 3 The dissectorisaimed betweenthe two lines marked on the
forearm.Once the pathway is created with the dissector, adissecting
obturatorisintroduced.
Disposable knife
(A)
(B)
Cannula
Locking
device
FIGURE 4 ( A )Astandard 4mm30 8 endoscope is introduced through
the cannula. ( B )The disposableknife, cannula, and lockingdevice
unassembled.
The Single-Portal Mirza Technique
&
277

FIGURE 6 The median nerve is visualized by rotating the cannula
radially.
FIGURE 7 The cannula can be rotated ulnarly to visualize the transverse carpal ligamentand the flexor tendons.
FIGURE 5 The transverse carpal ligament is visualized through the
endoscope.
FIGURE 8 The mounting blade is attached to the end of the scope with
alocking device.
(A)
(B)
FIGURE9 ( A,B )The transverse carpal ligament Lisdivided by
advancing the blade under direct endoscopic visualization through the
cannula from distal to proximal.
278
&
Rozental et al.

To date, the following complications have been reported
with endoscopic carpal tunnel release:
&
Injury to the median nerve: Dheansa and Belcher 4reported
two cases of median nerve injury using the original Agee
technique in patients under general anesthesia (12).
&
Injury to theulnar nerve: casesofulnar nervetransaction havebeenreportedusing theChowtwo-por tal
technique. This type of injury is thought to be the result
of entry into Guyon’s canal instead of the carpal canal,
or of loopingunderthe neurovascularbundle (13,14).
More commonperhaps arecases of transientulnar
nerve neuropraxia.
&
Injury to digital nerves: these range from transient digital
nerve neuropraxia to complete nerve transaction (15).
&
Injury to superficial palmar arch(16).
&
Injury to the flexor tendons: this was originally described in
apatient with arthritic contractures who was unable to fully
extend the wrist and metacarpophalangeal joints. The flexor
digitorum superficialis to the ring finger was found to be
tethered around the arthroscopicsheath (17).
&
Incomplete transection of the TCL leading to recurrence of
symptoms and reoperation (7).
&
PEARLS AND PITFALLS
We have attemptedover40Mirza single-portal endoscopic
carpal tunnel releases in our practice thus far.Toavoid complications, theinsertionofthe blunthemostat, elevator,and
dissecting cannula under the TCL is always performed gently
and without significant force. If resistance is met at any point in
the process, the procedureisconverted to an open carpal tunnel
release. We also actively identify the recurrent motor branch to
ensure that it is not at risk along the radial side of the incision. In
addition, when inserting the dissecting cannula proximally and
ulnarintothe distal forearm,care must be takentoavoid
compressing the recurrent motor branch against the proximal
aspect of the cannula.
At present, ourconversionrate to open carpal tunnel
release is approximately 20%. Following these careful guidelines, we have not had any complications to date.
&
CONCLUSIONS
Endoscopic carpal tunnel release continues to generate interest
among hand surgeons and patients alike. Despite worrisome
reports of complications in the initial stages, modifications to
thesurgicaltechniques andinstrumentation haveyielded
improved clinical results. The Mirza technique allows direct
visualization of the distal edge of the TCL, wheremost complications occur.Published series have revealed excellent patient
satisfactionbut randomized trials comparingthe distal
uniportal technique with open techniques as well as to other
endoscopic techniques are needed to validate the outcomes of
these studies.
&
SUMMATION POINTS
Indications
&
Same as for open procedure
&
Failure of conservative treatment
&
Thenar weakness or wasting
Contraindications
&
Space-occupying lesions
&
Limited wrist or finger extension
&
Congenital wrist anomalies
&
Any factor affecting the anatomy of the carpal canal
&
Pregnancy
&
Inflammatory arthritis (relative)
&
Prior carpal tunnel release (relative)
&
Patients on anticoagulant therapy (relative)
Outcomes
&
Similar outcome to other endoscopic or open carpal tunnel
release
&
Grip strength approached preoperative values by the fourth
postoperative week
&
Return to work at amean of 14 days after surgery
&
No pillar pain or scar tenderness
Complications
&
Transient neuropraxia
&
Reflex sympathetic dystrophy
&
Blade failure
&
REFERENCES
1. Amadio PC.The first carpal tunnel release? JHand Surg 1995;
20B:40–1.
2. Mirza MA, King ET,Tanveer S. Palmar uniportal extrabursal
endoscopic carpal tunnel release. Arthroscopy 1995; 11(1):82–90.
3. Trumble TE,Diao E, Abrams RA, Gilbert-Anderson MM. Singleportal endoscopiccarpal tunnel release compared with open
release: aprospective, randomized trial. JBone Joint Surg 2002;
84A:1107–15.
4. Ferdinand RD, MacLean JGB. Endoscopic versus open carpal
tunnel release in bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. JBone Joint
Surg2002; 84B:375–9.
5. MacDermid JC, RichardRS, Roth JH, King GJK. Endoscopic versus
open carpal tunnel release: arandomized trial. JHand Surg 2003;
28A:475–80.
6. Thoma A, Ve ltri K, Haines T, Duku E. Ameta-analysisofrandomized controlled trials comparing endoscopic and open carpal
tunnel decompression. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 11 4:1137–46.
FIGURE 10 The blade is removed and the endoscope reinserted to
visualize the divided edges of the transverse carpal ligament.
The Single-Portal Mirza Technique
&
279

7. Chow JCY,Hantes ME. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release: thirteen
years’ experience with the Chow technique.JHand Surg 2002;
27A:1011–8.
8. Saw NLB, Jones S, Shepstone L, Meyer M, Chapman PG ,
Logan AM. Early outcomes and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic
versus open carpal tunnel release: arandomized prospective trial.
JHand Surg2003; 28B:444–9.
9. Agee JM, McCarroll HRJ, Tortosa RD, et al. Endoscopic release of
the carpal tunnel: arandomized prospective multicenter study.
JHand Surg[Am] 1992; 17:987–95.
10. Nagle DJ. Amulticenter prospective review of 640 endoscopic
carpal tunnel releases using the transbursal and extrabursal chow
techniques. Arthroscopy 1996; 12(2):139–43.
11.Mirza MA, King ET.Newer techniquesofcarpal tunnel release.
Orthop Clin North Am 1996; 27(2):355–71.
12. Dheansa BS, Belcher HJ. Median nerve contusion during endoscopic carpal tunnel release. JHand Surg1998; 23B:110–1.
13. Del Pinel F, Cruz-Camara A, Jado E. Ulnar nerve transection as a
complication of two-portal endoscopiccarpal tunnel release: acase
report. JHand Surg1993; 18A:896–8.
14. Nath RK, Mackinnon SE, We eks PM .Ulnar nerve transaction during
endoscopic carpal tunnel release. JHand Surg 1993; 18:896–8.
15. Jeon IH, Kim PT,Park IH, Park BC, Ihn JC. High bifurcation of
median nerve at the wrist causing common digital nerve injury in
endoscopic carpal tunnel release. JHand Surg2003; 27B:580–2.
16. Brown RA, Gelberman RH, Seiler JGR, et al. Carpal tunnel release.
Aprospective, randomized assessment of open and endoscopic
methods. JBone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75:1265–75 (see comments).
17. Scoggin JF,Whipple TL.Apotential complication of endoscopic
carpal tunnel release. Arthroscopy 1992; 8:363–5.
280
&
Rozental et al.

36
Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: Chow Technique
James C.Y.Chow
Orthopaedic Center of Southern Illinois, Mount Vernon,Illinois, U.S.A.
Athanasios A. Papachristos
Orthopaedic Research Foundation of Southern Illinois, Mount Vernon, Illinois, U.S.A.
&
INTRODUCTION
&
History
Carpal tunnel syndrome was recognized by Sir James Paget in
1854 as amedian nerve compression following afracture of the
distal radius (1,2). Later in 1880, James Putman, aneurologist
from Boston, reported the symptoms suffered by agroup of his
patients (3) which would be considered as adescription of a
classic carpal tunnel syndrome today.The first formal description of the surgical release of transverse carpal ligament for the
treatment of this pathologic condition was reported in 1933 (4)
followed by Phalen’s classic article in 1950 (5). Since that time,
open carpal tunnel release has been established as the gold
standard for the surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome.
&
Evolution of the Chow Technique
Dr.James C.Y.Chow began working on endoscopic release of
the transverse carpal ligament in 1985, unaware that both Dr.
IchiroOkutsu in Japan and Dr.John Agee in California were
working on similar aims at approximately the same time. The
primary motivation of Dr.Chow’s concept wastocreatea
method for the surgical treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome
that could be able to preserve normal anatomic structures of the
wrist and hand by minimizing the surgical wound and thus,
resulting in abetter clinical outcome. Through persistent trials
and different approaches, aslotted cannula was developed late
in 1986. Following several monthsofrepetitive practice on
cadaveric hands, the procedure was completed in May 1987
and it was first performed in apatient in September of the same
year.There havebeensomemodifications of theoriginal
procedure since its conception.
Thefirst tworeportsinthe literature on thetopi cof
endoscopic carpaltunnelrelease,writtenbyChowand
Okutsu et al. separately,were published in the March issue of
Arthroscopy Journal in 1989 (6,7). In thenextyear, Chow
presented aconference paperbased on hisclinical results
after endoscopic carpal tunnel release in 149 cases at the 1990
AANA Annual Meeting in Orlando, Florida (8). In the fall of the
same year,another conference paper by Agee et al. (9) was
presented at the 1990 American Society for Surgeryofthe Hand
Annual MeetinginToronto,Canada, regardingthe clinical
results of amulticenter study with the use of the Agee technique
for the endoscopic release of the carpal ligament.
Therefore,three different surgical techniques were
developed in distinct locations worldwide aiming at the same
idea of minimal incision in the palm region for the surgical
treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. The common denominator of these three procedures is that they all utilize the current
technology in order to bring visualization of the surgery to a
video monitor with the use of acamera. Since the publishing of
thethree origi nalendoscopiccarpalligament releasetechniques, there has been an increasinglycontinuous interestand
also, alot of debate among surgeons regarding the safety and
efficacy of endoscopic procedure versus the open one. Several
modifications and variations to the three original ideas have
been made since their initial demonstration (10,11).
&
INDICATIONS
Whenever asurgeon deals with apathologic situation that has
to be managed surgically,specific criteria must be kept in mind
in order to designate the most appropriate surgical technique.
These criteria include indications–contraindications, exposure
and visualization of the related anatomical structures,reproducibility,areas onable learningcurve,and an acceptable
complication rate. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release does have
the potential to become adangerous procedureifperformed by
inexperienced surgeons(12–15).Considerable intraoperative
complications havebeenrep ortedthroughoutthe United
States by surgeons who have used this technique (16–19). This
situation has raised acontroversy among surgeons regarding
the value of endoscopy for carpal tunnel surgery.However,it
has also been shown that endoscopic carpal ligament release
can be performed safely by experienced surgeons, although its
learning curve is steep sometimes, and can give both the patient
and the surgeon agreat deal of satisfaction (20). The safety
of this procedureseems to have improved not only due to the
surgical experience that has been gained but also due to the
instrumentationthat hasbeendev eloped andthe better
knowledge of the endoscopic anatomy.
The indications for the open surgical release of transverse
carpal tunnel ligament have been well established and, in most
cases, they applytoendoscopiccarpaltunnelrelease.
In most cases, previous conservative management by means
of wrist splinting, alteration of daily activities, physical therapy,
and nonsteroidalanti-inflammatory oral medication have
failed.Aprevious performed open surgical releaseofthe
carpal ligament was not considered to be acontraindication
for the endoscopic procedure. Contraindications to the endoscopic procedure include space-occupying lesions, limited wrist
extension, congenitalwrist anomalies, andany factor that
affects the anatomy of the region. Rheumatoid patients with
abundant tenosynovium should be managed with caution as
well as patients who had previously sustained afracture of the
hook of hamate. These and other conditions that require direct
visualization of the carpal canal are relative contraindications
(21,22).Obesi ty,diabetes, andaprevious performed open

carpal tunnel release are not considered to be contraindications
for the endoscopic release of the carpal ligament. During the
endoscopic procedure, if any pathology or anatomic variation is
detected which either limits the view or obstructs the access into
thecarpalcanal, thesurgeon shouldconverttoanopen
procedure. The patient should be well informed befo re
surgery of apossibleconversionbecause of theaforementioned reasons.
Theadvantages of endoscopic over open carpaltunnel
release include no hypertrophic scar or scar tenderness, no
pillar pain, less compromise to the pinch or grip strength, and
an earlier return-to-work and dailyactivities. However, the
surgeon can be in front of unexpected difficulties, e.g., ganglion,
neurofibroma, and neurilemmoma, that limit visualization into
thecarpalcanal.Asinany surgicalprocedure,safetyand
successare dependentupon athoroughknowledge of the
anatomy of the area, adequate training, and familiarity with
the use and capabilities of the instrumentation. Surgeons who
are not familiarized with endoscopes and arthroscopic techniques may give rise to major iatrogenic complications.
&
CONSIDERATIONS FOR PREOPERATIVE PLANNING
Carpal tunnel syndrome is acompression neuropathy of the
median nerve at the wrist and due to its incidence it counts for
approximately 463,673 carpal tunnelreleasesperformed
annuallyinthe UnitedStates (23,24). Patients whohave
developed this syndromeusually presentwith atypical
history of characteristic symptoms such as nocturnal pain and
paresthesias, numbness to the distribution of the median nerve
distal to thewrist,and weakness of thethenar muscles.
Although history is very important in the diagnosis of carpal
tunnel syndrome, the physician should also be aware about the
patient’s general health condition and family history.Congenital diseases or anomalies, diseases of the connective tissue,
systemic and metabolic disorders, and aprevious sustained
injury to the distal forearm and wrist should be taken under
consideration. Amalunited fracture of the distal radius, previously performed surgery in the wrist area, and ahypoplastic
or aplastic hook of the hamate (25) can produce difficulties
while the surgeon is trying to access the carpal canal with the
use of the custom designed surgical instrumentation.
Physical examination will assist in the patient evaluation.
In an acute case, there is tenderness along the carpal canal area.
Lightpercussion over themediannerve at the wristarea
produces a“passing of electric current” sensation that radiates
to the median nerve distribution known as Tinel’s sign. Phalen’s
sign is evoked by holding the wrists at maximum flexion and
the dorsal aspects of the hands in full contact like a“reverse
praying” position. This position narrowsthe carpal canal and if
reproduces the paresthesias in the fingers within 60 seconds, the
sign is consideredpositive. As thepathologicalcondition
advances, less time is necessary to evoke aresponse. Other
examinationsinclude themonofilamenttest, two-point
discrimination, reverse Phalen’s test, and tourniquet test. In
the late stages, with thenar muscle atrophy,one can observe the
muscle waste in the thenar area(26–28). Muscle weakness is
tested subjectively by resisted palmar abduction of the thumb
against the examiner’s index finger,and comparison of one
hand to the other.Acarefully performed physical examination
as wellasthe previous taken historywill both help the
physician to distinguish betweenanisolatedcompression
neuropathy at the wrist and adouble crush syndrome (29).
Clinical correlation of the double crush phenomenon has been
demonstratedbythe high incidenceofconcurrentcarpal
syndrome in patients with cervical radiculopathy (30,31). An
equally high incidence of association of carpal tunnel syndrome
and amore proximal entrapment of the median nerve has also
been reported (32). Therefore, the physician must exclude the
possibility of thoracic outlet syndrome, pronator compression
syndrome in the forearm, and even acentral nervous system
disease (33–35).
Electromyography and nerve conduction velocity (NCV)
tests will also assist for the detection of carpal tunnel syndrome.
Indications forsurgery should notbedecidedoraltered
according to theresults of NCVtests, especially when the
results are normal but the patient has the clinical signs and
symptoms of the syndrome (36–40). Adelay of the distal latency
of the median nerve of 7.0 msec or longer represents significant
compression of the median nerve; if present, surgery should be
considered without further delay.The most important aspects
in diagnosingcarpaltunnelsyndrome arethe hist ory and
physical examination. Electrodiagnostic studies of the median
nerve are adjunct used to confirm the diagnosis and perhaps
suggest how the patient will respond to surgery.
Wrist radiography can rule out any possibility of congenital
or acquired bone and joint deformity,abnormality,orpathology.
Previous sustained fractures of the distal forearm and wrist
should be taken under consideration. Standard anteroposterior
and lateral views of the distal forearm–wrist and atunnel view
of the wrist are required, either to detect or put the examiner
underskepticismfor further inve stigationofthe aforementioned conditions. If amore extensive study is indicated,
magneticresonance imaging, computed tomography scan
ultrasound bone scan, and arthrogram of the wrist may be
necessary (41–43).
&
SURGICAL TECHNIQUE
Initially,the original technique was described by Chow as a
transbursal approach to the carpal tunnel requiring penetration
of the ulnar bursa (6,44). Due to the results of amulticenter
study (45,46), the original technique has been modified in an
attempt to decrease the complications and the learning curve.
Theconversion to an extrabursal techniquehas made the
surgicalprocedure much easier andsafer offering abetter
visualizationofthe proximal transverse carpalligament
(47–49). The following is adescription of theextrabursal,
dual-portal technique.
&
Operating Room Setup
The patient is placed in asupine position and ahand table is
used.Two videomonitors arepreferred,althoughsome
surgeons can manage the procedure with only one. One of the
two monitors should face the surgeon and the other should face
the assistant. The surgeon sits on the ulnar side of the patient
and the assistant faces the surgeon (Fig. 1A). The arthroscopic
equipment consists of ashort 4.0 mm ! 308 video-endoscope
that preventslight guide from interfering with the patient’s
forearmbyhaving the lightpost on thesameside as the
direction of view,acamera apparatus, alight cord, acamera
inputdevice, andalightsourcedevice(Fig. 1B). Optional
equipment includes aDVD video recorder and avideo printer
for theprintingofany captured images.Water pump and
shaver equipment is not used.
Astandard handset should be available. Specific instrumentation for the procedure, designed by Dr.Chow,comprises
an ECTRAe System Kit and an ECTRAe Disposable Kit (Smith
&NephewEndoscopy, Andover, Massachusetts,U.S.A.).
282&Chow and Papachristos

The ECTRA System Kit includes the video-endoscope, slotted
cannula, dissecting obturator,curved blunt dissector,palmar
archsuppressor,probe, retractors, and hand holder (Fig. 2). The
dissecting obturator is attached with adetachable handle that
can also take some other types of obturators included in the kit
(conical, boat-nose obturator),the latter are not beingused
routinely.The ECTRA Disposable Kit includes aprobe knife, a
triangle knife, aretrograde knife, ahand pad, and swabs (Fig. 3).
These knives allow the surgeon to determine both the direction
anddepth of cut. Standardpreparationsand drapingare
performed as usual without the application of atourniquet.
Before the introduction of local anesthesia, askin marker is used
to map landmarks for the entry and exit portals.
&
Anesthesia
Local anesthesia combined with intravenousmedicationisrecommended forthe procedurebecause it allows thepatient and
thesurgeon to communicate. An alertpatient caninformthe
surgeon, during theprocedure,about anyabnormalsensation in
Retractors
Hand holder
Slotted cannula
4mm x 30
˚
Videoendoscope
Probe
Palmar arch suppressor
Dissecting obturator
Curved blunt dissector
Detachable handle
FIGURE 2 Instrumentation included in the ECTRAe System Kit (Smith &Nephew Endoscopy, Andover,
Massachusetts, U.S.A.).
Light cord
(B)
VideoEndoscope
Camera
Camerainput device
Light source device
(A)
FIGURE 1 ( A )Operating room setup for the endoscopiccarpal tunnel release using the Chow dual-portal
technique. ( B )Arthroscopic equipment that is appropriate for the performance of this technique.
EndoscopicCarpal Tunnel Release: Chow Technique
&
283
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
