Operative Treatment of the Cubital Tunnel Syndrome: Comparison of Anterior Submuscular Transposition and Anterior Subfascial Transposition of the Ulnar Nerve.
- Author:
Soo Hwan KANG
1
;
Seok Whan SONG
;
Il Jung PARK
;
Sang Uk LEE
;
Seung Koo RHEE
;
Seung Bum PARK
Author Information
1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea. sw.song@catholic.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Cubital tunnel syndrome;
Anterior submuscular transposition;
Anterior subfascial transposition
- MeSH:
Arthritis;
Cubital Tunnel Syndrome;
Elbow;
Follow-Up Studies;
Hand;
Humans;
Recurrence;
Ulnar Nerve;
Ulnar Neuropathies
- From:Journal of the Korean Microsurgical Society
2008;17(1):36-41
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
Surgical treatment of compressive ulnar neuropathy at the elbow has been performed with a wide variety of techniques. Among these techniques, anterior submuscular transposition of the ulnar nerve has been regarded as the method of choice by many authors. It has many advantages including a low recurrence rate, scar-free vascular bed, and protection from repeated trauma to the nerve. However, anterior submuscular transposition is technically demanding and requires more extensive soft tissue dissection. On the other hand, anterior subfascial transposition is less invasive, requires a relatively shorter operation time than the submuscular technique, and also can be done safely even in patiensts with elbow arthritis. We evaluated the clinical results of anterior submuscular transposition compared with anterior subfascial transposition. Fifteen patients underwent anterior submuscular transposition and ten patients underwent anterior subfascial transposition of the ulnar nerve. The mean follow-up time was 15 months (range 10 to 38 months) in the anterior submuscular transposition group and 7 months (range 6 to 15 months) in the anterior subfascial transposition group. According to the outcome status determination algorithm devised by Mowlavi, 3 patients (20%) showed total relief, 10 patiensts (66.7%) improvement and 2 patients (13.3%) no changes in the anterior submuscular transposition group. In the anterior subfascial transposition group, 2 patients (20%) showed total relief, 7 patients (70%) improvement and 1 patient (10%) displayed no changes. Statistically there was no significant difference of the clinical results between the two surgical techniques. Therefore we would suggest anterior subfascial transposition of the ulnar nerve as a preferred method for treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome.
