Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 3, 2025
Novel Triple-Loop Technique for Suturing TFCC Injuries without Transosseous Tunnel
Published on: May 23, 2025
Return to Sport After Fasciotomy for Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome of the Forearm: A Systematic Review
Richard J Gawel1, YuChia Wang1, Bryson R Kemler1
1Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Background:
Forearm chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS) can represent considerable functional impairment in certain active populations, particularly motorcycle racers. Patients with forearm CECS frequently require fasciotomy to relieve symptoms and return to sport (RTS).
Purpose:
To evaluate the rate at which athletes RTS after fasciotomy for forearm CECS and to compare RTS outcomes between fasciotomy techniques.
Study Design:
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods:
Adhering to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic review of the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases was performed from database inception to December 2022 to identify all published reports of forearm CECS managed with fasciotomy. Included studies were analyzed for demographic information, surgical approaches, rehabilitation parameters, RTS rates, time from surgery at which athletes resumed sport, complications, and recurrence.
Results:
A total of 38 studies (15 level 4 case series, 23 case reports) accounting for 500 patients (831 forearms) who underwent open fasciotomy (112 patients), minimally invasive fasciotomy (166 patients), and endoscopically assisted fasciotomy (222 patients) satisfied inclusion criteria. Most patients (88.0%) were motorcycle racers. The overall RTS rate at any level (RTS-A) was 94.2% (97.3%, 92.2%, and 98.5% for the open fasciotomy, minimally invasive fasciotomy, and endoscopically assisted fasciotomy groups, respectively; P = .010), and the overall RTS at preinjury level or higher was 86.8% (95.9%, 85.6%, and 95.2% for the open fasciotomy, minimally invasive fasciotomy, and endoscopically assisted fasciotomy groups, respectively; P = .132). There was a significant difference in RTS-A between the minimally invasive fasciotomy and endoscopically assisted fasciotomy groups (P = .004). The overall RTS time was 5.1 ± 2.3 weeks, patient satisfaction was 85.1%, and the recurrence rate was 2.4%, and there were no significant differences between fasciotomy approach groups (P = .456, P = .886, and P = .487, respectively).
Conclusion:
Patients who underwent fasciotomy for forearm CECS had high rates of RTS, quick RTS time, high levels of satisfaction, and low rates of recurrence. Outcomes were largely similar between the 3 fasciotomy approaches.
