Endoscopic carpal tunnel release has the advantage over open release of reduced tissue trauma and postoperative morbidity. Limited open carpal tunnel release has also been shown to have comparable results, but is easier to perform and is safer. We have compared the results of both techniques in a prospective, randomised trial. Thirty patients with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome had simultaneous bilateral release. The technique of release was randomly allocated to either two-portal endoscopic release (ECTR) or limited open release using the Strickland instrumentation (LOCTR). The results showed that the outcome was similar at follow-up of one year using both techniques. However, the LOCTR group had significantly less tenderness of the scar at the second and fourth postoperative week (p < 0.01). There was also less thenar and hypothenar (pillar) pain after LOCTR. Subjective evaluation showed a preference for LOCTR

The advantages and disadvantages of endoscopic compared with open carpal tunnelreleasearecontroversial. We have performed a prospective, randomised, blinded assessment in a district general hospital in order to determine if there was any demonstrable advantage in undertaking either technique. Twenty-five patients with confirmed bilateral idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome were randomised to undergo endoscopic release by the single portal Agee technique to one hand and open release to the other. Independent preoperative and postoperative assessment was undertaken by a hand therapist who was blinded to the type of treatment. Follow-up was for 12 months. The operating time was two minutes shorter for the open technique (p < 0.005). At all stages of postoperative assessment, the endoscopic technique had no significant advantages in terms of return of muscle strength and assessment of hand function, grip strength, manual dexterity or sensation. In comparison with open release, single-portal endoscopic carpal tunnel release has a similar incidence of complications and a similar return of hand function, but is a slightly slower technique to undertake

In a previous study the prevalence of Raynaud’s phenomenon (RP) in patients with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) was found to be 60% which is much higher than that in the general population. We undertook a further study of the same cohort of patients have both CTS and RP and who had an open release of the carpal tunnel, to observe the effects of the operation on RP. We observed whether the symptoms of RP improved, and repeated the cold provocation tests to see if the arterial pulse which was decreased before operation would recover. We rated the outcome as good when the patients showed both an improvement of the symptoms of RP and a normal pulse amplitude after exposure to cold, fair when the pulse amplitude recovered to more than two-thirds of that before exposure, and poor when cold hypersensitivity was persistent or showed the same degree of decreased pulse amplitude as observed before operation. Of the 18 patients with both conditions, ten (56%) had good and four (22%) fair results, with a mean recovery time of 4.2 months (6 weeks to 1 year) after operation. If the vasospasm seen in RP is an expression of vasomotor irritation in the carpal tunnel, these findings suggest that local compression of vasomotor fibres in the carpal tunnel can also be relieved by the release of this structure. Careful consideration, however, is still required in treating patients with both conditions since in some cases. RP may be superimposed or it may have other origins