Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2021 October;57(5) > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2021 October;57(5):775-82

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   Freefree

European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2021 October;57(5):775-82

DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.21.06682-X

Copyright © 2021 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Ultrasound-guided perineural vs. peritendinous corticosteroid injections in carpal tunnel syndrome: a randomized controlled trial

Kamal MEZIAN 1 , Karolína SOBOTOVÁ 2, Martin KULIHA 3, Ke-Vin CHANG 4, Jiří CEÉ 5, Yvona ANGEROVÁ 1, Levent ÖZÇAKAR 6

1 Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, General University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic; 2 Department of Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine, Second Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic; 3 Department of Neurology, Bruntál, Czech Republic; 4 Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Bei-Hu Branch, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei City, Taiwan; 5 Department of Neurosurgery, J.E. Purkyně University, Masaryk Hospital, Ústí nad Labem, Czech Republic; 6 Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Hacettepe University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey



BACKGROUND: Corticosteroid injections are proven to be effective in the management of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS); however, the optimal injection site still remains unclear.
AIM: The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of perineural vs. peritendinous target sites for corticosteroid injection in CTS.
DESIGN: A randomized, single-blind, controlled trial.
SETTING: Outpatients, tertiary care center.
POPULATION: Forty-six patients were equally randomized into two intervention groups as group A (18 female and five male patients; mean age: 50.0±15.9 years; mean symptom duration: 5.9±3.3 months) and group B (19 female, four male patients; mean age: 54.3±15.0 years; mean symptom duration: 5.9±4.7 months).
METHODS: Methylprednisolone acetate (40 mg) and 1 mL of 1% trimecaine hydrochloride was injected next to the median nerve (group A) or among flexor tendons away from the nerve (group B) under ultrasound (US) guidance. The visual analogue scale was used as the primary outcome measure, and the symptom severity scale and functional status scale of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire were used as the secondary subjective outcome measures. Two-point discrimination, grip strength, cross-sectional area, and distal motor latency were assessed as objective outcome measures. The data were collected at baseline and at 2, 6 and 12 weeks after the injection.
RESULTS: Both groups showed improvement in subjective and objective measures at 2 weeks following the injection - also maintained up to 12 weeks during the follow-up (P<0.05). However, no difference was observed between the two groups (P<0.05). No serious adverse effects were observed in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: Both intervention techniques seem to be effective and safe in the conservative treatment of CTS.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Based on this study results, it might be noteworthy that physicians can opt for perineural or peritendinous injections without compromising the treatment efficacy and safety. Herewith, US guidance is, for sure, necessary for performing safe and accurate injections.


KEY WORDS: Median nerve; Ultrasonography; Nerve compression syndromes; Adrenal cortex hormones; Carpal tunnel syndrome; Intra-articular injections

top of page