Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2026
09:34
Structured Motor Rehabilitation After Selective Nerve Transfers
Published on: August 15, 2019
Randomized, prospective study comparing ulnar neurolysis in situ with submuscular transposition
Michael Biggs1, Jonathan A Curtis
1Department of Neurosurgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, North Shore Medical Centre, St. Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales, 2065, Australia. biggs@idx.com.au
Neurosurgery
|February 8, 2006
Summary
For idiopathic, symptomatic ulnar nerve compression at the elbow, both neurolysis and transposition offer similar outcomes. However, neurolysis in situ is recommended due to a lower complication rate, particularly deep wound infections.
Area of Science:
- Orthopedic Surgery
- Neurosurgery
- Peripheral Nerve Surgery
Background:
- Ulnar nerve compression at the elbow is a common condition.
- Optimal surgical management remains debated, balancing efficacy and morbidity.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the outcomes and complications of neurolysis in situ versus submuscular transposition for idiopathic, symptomatic ulnar nerve compression at the elbow.
Main Methods:
- Prospective randomized study of 44 patients.
- Patients assigned to either neurolysis (n=23) or transposition (n=21).
- Outcomes assessed using symptomatic evaluation and standardized grading systems at 1, 6, and 12 months post-surgery.
Main Results:
- Both surgical techniques demonstrated comparable neurological improvement rates (61% neurolysis vs. 67% transposition).
- Submuscular transposition group had a significantly higher incidence of deep wound infections (3/21) compared to the neurolysis group (0/23).
Conclusions:
- Neurolysis in situ and submuscular transposition are both effective for treating ulnar nerve compression at the elbow.
- Neurolysis in situ is suggested as the preferred treatment due to its lower complication profile.
- Submuscular transposition may be considered in specific clinical scenarios.
