American Association for Hand Surgery
Theme: Beyond Innovation

Back to 2019 Abstracts


Rates of Revision Surgery Following In Situ Decompression versus Anterior Transposition for the Treatment of Idiopathic Cubital Tunnel Syndrome
Jack G Graham, BS; The Rothman Institute, Philadelphia, PA; Asif Ilyas, MD
Orthopaedics, Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA

INTRODUCTION:
The current understanding of revision rates following surgery for the primary surgical treatment of idiopathic cubital tunnel syndrome remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to describe and compare the rate of revision surgery following in situ decompression versus anterior transposition after the surgical treatment of idiopathic cubital tunnel syndrome.
METHODS:
A retrospective cohort study was performed at a single institution by querying the records for all cubital tunnel syndrome surgeries performed between January 2010 and December 2015. The initial query resulted in 1967 cases. Exclusion criteria included acute trauma, concurrent unrelated primary elbow procedure, revision surgery, incomplete records, and age younger than 18 or older than 89. A total of 1384 surgeries met criteria for study inclusion. Descriptive statistics were performed.
RESULTS:
Of the 1384 procedures, 979 were in situ decompressions (70.7%), while the remaining 405 were anterior transpositions (29.3%). In total there were 39 primary cubital tunnel surgeries that resulted in a revision surgery (2.8%). The revision rate for in situ decompression was 3.1% and the revision rate for anterior transposition was 2.2%.
CONCLUSION:
In the surgical treatment of idiopathic cubital tunnel syndrome, overall revision rate is low (2.8%). Additionally, this study found no significant difference in revision rate between in situ decompression and anterior transposition.


Back to 2019 Abstracts