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

Carpal tunnel syndrome is a common condition and clinical diagnosis is often easily made. A system of direct referral for day-case carpal tunnel surgery was introduced. General practitioners, physicians and surgeons were advised of the service and the criteria for referral, which included female patients with bilateral symptoms and physical signs, and some response to conservative treatment. All patients were reviewed preoperatively by the senior author (GEBG). The service was an alternative to standard outpatient referral. A total of 51 patients was seen. Two were refused surgery. In all those who underwent surgery, the symptoms either resolved or were improved. The service was well received, although some patients felt that they were poorly informed preoperatively. The mean waiting time for surgery was reduced by four months and the patients avoided an outpatient appointment. Direct access day-case carpal tunnel surgery works well by reducing delays and the costs of treatment. Adequate patient information is important to make the best of the service

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