The purpose of this study was to identify aetiological that may determine prognosis in ulnar nerve lesions and to evaluate the role of non-operative treatment. 148 consecutive patients (100 male) with 170 electrophysiologically proven (by nerve conduction and electromyography) ulnar nerve lesions were identified from the departmental records. Patient details, symptoms, known aetiology and treatment profile were recorded. Each patient was then contacted by telephone and/or questionnaire 1–6 (median 3. 8) years following electrodiagnosis to determine clinical progress and outcome. In patients with sensory symptoms alone or non-progressive painless motor symptoms, non-operative treatment was commenced. This involved advice on activity modifications and protection with a tubipad bandage or night spin.

12. 9% and 8. 8% of lesions were due to injury and intra-operative pressure respectively. Other causes included deformity and/or synovitis from arthritis of the elbow, repeated pressure, medial epicondylitis and benign space occupying lesions. 58. 2% were idiopathic with no clinical aetiological factor. 22 patients had expected bilateral lesions whereas 15 had contralateral lesions that were not symptomatic. 89. 4% and 4. 7% of lesions occurred at the elbow and wrist respectively. 83% of patients received non-operative first line treatment. 21% of these required operative intervention following further clinical and electrophysiological assessment. Partial or complete recovery occurred in 80%, 67% and 52% of the intra-operative, idiopathic and injury cases respectively (P< 0. 05).

We conclude lesions of the ulnar nerve predominate in males and can be treated non-operatively providing clinical and electrophysiological monitoring is possible. Bilaterality is not uncommon and should be excluded. Lesions due to injury have a worse prognosis than those caused by direct continuous or repeated pressure or where no aetiological factor exists.