| Objective:To compare the short-term efficacy of small incision precision therapy and traditional ulnar nerve in situ release in the treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome.Methods:Collected from our hospital between October 2018 and October 2019 statistical analysis of cubital tunnel syndrome patients medical records(33 patients,36 cases),according to different operative methods are divided into traditional ulnar nerve in situ solutions group(the control group,n = 16)and small incision in situ pine ulnar nerve solutions group(the treatment group,n = 20),and followed up for 6 months,compare the operation time,incision length,grip strength,pinch strength,two-point discrimination as a result,using subjective evaluation of MHQ scores and improve the Bishop scores.Results:The symptoms and signs of the two surgical methods were significantly improved,especially in terms of operation duration and incision length,the small incision group was better than the traditional operation.MHQ pain score and appearance score were better in the small incision group(P<0.05),and there were no significant differences in the other four indicators between the groups.Postoperative grip strength,pinch strength and two-point discrimination were significantly improved in both groups.The excellent and good rates of improved Bishop score were 87.5%(the control group)and 85%(the treatment group)respectively(P>0.05).There were no significant differences in Mc Gowan typing and improvement degree between groups.Conclusion:We used small incision in situ release under ultrasound localization to treat cubital tunnel syndrome,and the efficacy was similar to that reported in th e literature,with quick postoperative recovery and high patient satisfaction.Compared with endoscopic treatment,this procedure is simpler to operate,reduces the complications caused by ulnar nerve preposition,and achieves a high excellent and good rate,so it can be used as a reliable minimally invasive treatment method. |
PDF Full Text Request