Skip to main content
Kent Academic Repository

Time to recovery following open and endoscopic carpal tunnel decompression: meta-analysis

Hartrick, Olivia J., Turner, Rebecca K., Freethy, Alexander, Khatri, Chetan, Chong, Lauren, Wade, Ryckie G., Wormald, Justin C. R., Wiberg, Akira, Rodrigues, Jeremy N., Harrison, Conrad and others. (2025) Time to recovery following open and endoscopic carpal tunnel decompression: meta-analysis. BJS Open, 9 (4). Article Number zraf085. ISSN 2474-9842. (doi:10.1093/bjsopen/zraf085) (KAR id:110812)

Abstract

Background

Carpal tunnel release (CTR) can be performed using either an open or endoscopic approach. The patient recovery trajectories remain poorly understood. This study aimed to define and compare patient-reported recovery following unilateral open and endoscopic CTR.

Methods

A PRISMA-compliant, preregistered (CRD42023427718) systematic review was conducted, searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases on 4 July 2023 and 21 August 2024. Studies were included if they reported recovery data (patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs)) at predefined time points for adults undergoing unilateral CTR. Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire and Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were extracted. Standardized mean change (SMC) scores from baseline were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. An innovative modification of the National Institutes of Health quality assessment tools was used to evaluate the risk of bias.

Results

In all, 49 studies were included (4546 participants included in the analysis; 3137 open CTR, 1409 endoscopic CTR). Both approaches improved PROM scores over 12 weeks, with early (4-week) outcomes strongly correlating (>0.89) with later (12-week) outcomes. Symptoms continued improving up to 104 weeks. At 1 week, open CTR showed symptomatic deterioration (SMC 10.29; 95% confidence interval (c.i.) 6.35 and 14.21 respectively), comparatively, endoscopic CTR demonstrated an improvement (SMC −2.83; 95% c.i. −7.80 and 2.14 respectively). By 2 weeks, symptom severity remained slightly worse in open CTR, but confidence intervals overlapped from week 3 and thereafter open CTR showed greater symptomatic improvement. Most studies had a high risk of bias and measured outcomes too infrequently for a granular comparison.

Conclusions

Patient-reported recovery trajectories for CTR can inform patient counselling and future research. Endoscopic CTR may result in fewer symptoms in the first 2 weeks, but open CTR may offer comparable or potentially greater improvement thereafter. Future trials with high-frequency PROM capture should prioritize early (first 3 weeks) and long-term (≥24 weeks) outcomes.

Item Type: Article
DOI/Identification number: 10.1093/bjsopen/zraf085
Uncontrolled keywords: Plastic surgery, Orthopaedics, Humans, Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, Endoscopy, Treatment Outcome, Decompression, Surgical, Recovery of Function, Time Factors, Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Subjects: R Medicine
Institutional Unit: Schools > School of Natural Sciences > Conservation
Former Institutional Unit:
There are no former institutional units.
Funders: Natural Environment Research Council (https://ror.org/02b5d8509)
SWORD Depositor: JISC Publications Router
Depositing User: JISC Publications Router
Date Deposited: 05 Sep 2025 14:32 UTC
Last Modified: 17 Oct 2025 11:03 UTC
Resource URI: https://kar.kent.ac.uk/id/eprint/110812 (The current URI for this page, for reference purposes)

University of Kent Author Information

  • Depositors only (login required):

Total unique views of this page since July 2020. For more details click on the image.