Comparative Analysis of Ultrasound-Assisted Precise Localization vs. Traditional Open Incision in Situ Decompression...

To retrospectively analyze and compare ultrasound-assisted localization in situ with the traditional, open incision method for treating cubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS).

We retrospectively analyzed 51 patients treated between 2018 and 2022 and categorized them according to treatment method: ultrasound-assisted precise localization in situ decompression (n=21; Cohort 1) and traditional open incision in situ decompression (n=30; Cohort 2). We additionally collected Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) scores, modified Bishop scores, aesthetic appearance, preoperative Dellon's stage, and analgesics requirements. Additional dependent variables of interest included operation time, hospital stay duration, complications, and reoperation rate.

Neither cohort demonstrated significant changes in Dellon's stage, modified Bishop score, or VAS scores between baseline and 6 weeks postoperative. Cohort 1 showed better aesthetics and postoperative VSS and VAS scores than Cohort 1. In addition, Cohort 1 enjoyed a significantly shorter mean operation time and hospital stay. Cohort 1 had 5 (23.80%) complications, including superficial infection (n=1), hematoma (n=1), and incomplete decompression (n=3). Cohort 2 had 9 complications (30.00%), including superficial infection (n=2), hematoma (n=2), and severe scarring (n=5). The partial, incomplete decompression cases in Cohort 1 and the severe scar case in Cohort 2 were treated with reoperation.

Both procedures effectively treated most cases of CuTS and were associated with good postoperative outcomes. Patients who underwent ultrasound-assisted localization in situ decompression had shorter surgeries and hospital stays, better postoperative aesthetics, better VSS and VAS scores, and required less pain medication during the postoperative period. Traditional open incision in situ produced a more thorough decompression.