FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4239147704> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4239147704 endingPage "1042" @default.
• W4239147704 startingPage "1042" @default.
• W4239147704 abstract "I thank Dr. Wiwanitkit for the letter. I address the 3 issues as follows:1Generalizability of the results. Because this is a single-center study involving a single surgeon,1Nakamichi K. Tachibana S. Yamamoto S. Ida M. Percutaneous carpal tunnel release compared with mini-open release using ultrasonographic guidance for both techniques.J Hand Surg. 2010; 35A: 437-445Google Scholar I am unable to answer this question. I agree that the results of any surgical technique depend on the surgeon's experience. This seems particularly the case with the percutaneous carpal tunnel release (PCTR) and mini-open carpal tunnel release (mini-OCTR) techniques because both use ultrasonography, which is examiner-dependent and involves a learning curve. I therefore think that, during a learning process, one would need a longer operating time and have a higher chance of complications, which would produce variable results. With experience, however, the techniques could be performed without difficulties, and then the results would be less variable and more generalizable. To confirm this speculation, however, similar comparative studies in different institutions are needed.2Cost comparison. The mean cost of surgery and follow-up visits until the wound was healed (based on the Japanese government-controlled medical billing system and adjusted for 2007 USD) was USD514 for the PCTR and USD522 for the mini-OCTR. The blade used in the former (USD20) was more expensive than a no. 15 blade in the latter (USD1). However, the quicker wound healing in the PCTR group decreased hospital visits for wound care and offset the blade cost. There was no significant difference in overall cost (p = .21). For cost reduction, unlike the previous report,2Nakamichi K. Tachibana S. Ultrasonographically assisted carpal tunnel release.J Hand Surg. 1997; 22A: 853-862Google Scholar I no longer use a sterile plastic bag to wrap the scanner and sterile jelly. I sterilize the scanner and fill saline between the scanner and palm instead. In addition, I perform the techniques without an assistant and scrub nurse.3Study design. To provide a uniform model, this study included idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome only. However, the majority of patients visiting our institute have underlying diseases, most frequently hemodialysis-associated amyloidosis, which made the number of idiopathic patients small. Nevertheless, this study demonstrated significantly better outcomes in the PCTR group with respect to postoperative morbidity, functional return, and satisfaction (p < .05). This suggests that the differences between the 2 groups were large enough to confirm with a small sample size. Lack of randomization is another limitation. As shown in the tables, however, the preoperative demographic, clinical, and electrophysiologic data from both groups were comparable, probably because the study population was homogenous. Based on these considerations, I think that the results support our hypothesis that the outcomes of the mini-OCTR improve with further reduction of surgical trauma. Combining this study1Nakamichi K. Tachibana S. Yamamoto S. Ida M. Percutaneous carpal tunnel release compared with mini-open release using ultrasonographic guidance for both techniques.J Hand Surg. 2010; 35A: 437-445Google Scholar and our previous comparison of the mini-OCTR and standard open release, showing similar advantages in the former,2Nakamichi K. Tachibana S. Ultrasonographically assisted carpal tunnel release.J Hand Surg. 1997; 22A: 853-862Google Scholar I believe that the less surgical trauma the technique involves, the less postoperative morbidity and the earlier functional return and achievement of satisfaction the patient has. Percutaneous Carpal Tunnel Release Versus Mini-Open Carpal Tunnel ReleaseJournal of Hand SurgeryVol. 35Issue 6PreviewI read the recent publication by Nakamichi et al. with great interest.1 Nakamichi et al. concluded that “The PCTR provides the same neurologic recovery as does the mini-OCTR. The former leads to less postoperative morbidity and earlier functional return and achievement of satisfaction.1” I agree that the results in this work might lead to this conclusion. However, there are some points to be discussed. First, it is not surprising that the same neurological recovery could be derived from both techniques. Full-Text PDF" @default.
• W4239147704 created "2022-05-12" @default.
• W4239147704 creator A5048480905 @default.
• W4239147704 date "2010-06-01" @default.
• W4239147704 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W4239147704 title "In Reply" @default.
• W4239147704 cites W1981205247 @default.
• W4239147704 cites W2074210946 @default.
• W4239147704 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2010.03.045" @default.
• W4239147704 hasPublicationYear "2010" @default.
• W4239147704 type Work @default.
• W4239147704 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4239147704 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4239147704 hasAuthorship W4239147704A5048480905 @default.
• W4239147704 hasBestOaLocation W42391477041 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C2777788442 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C2777832143 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C2779746960 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C2780813298 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C2910872340 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C141071460 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C2777788442 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C2777832143 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C2779746960 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C2780813298 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C2910872340 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C61434518 @default.
• W4239147704 hasConceptScore W4239147704C71924100 @default.
• W4239147704 hasIssue "6" @default.
• W4239147704 hasLocation W42391477041 @default.
• W4239147704 hasOpenAccess W4239147704 @default.
• W4239147704 hasPrimaryLocation W42391477041 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W1989471692 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W2004959619 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W2039021823 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W2040531330 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W2195421099 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W2339670053 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W2409315570 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W2469871483 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W3215915653 @default.
• W4239147704 hasRelatedWork W4301846944 @default.
• W4239147704 hasVolume "35" @default.
• W4239147704 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4239147704 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4239147704 workType "article" @default.