Prospective Comparison of Techniques for Cubital Tunnel Release
Compression of the ulnar nerve at the elbow (cubital tunnel syndrome) is the second most common compressive neuropathy of the upper extremity (carpal tunnel is the most common). Patients who fail conservative treatment (activity modification, splinting, medications) are offered cubital tunnel release. There are multiple techniques to decompress the ulnar nerve at the elbow, but the ideal release has not been determined. These techniques vary from simple decompression of the nerve (in-situ release, endoscopic release), to decompressing the nerve and moving it anteriorly to take tension off the nerve (subcutaneous transposition, sub-fascial transposition, sub muscular transposition), and removing part of the medial epicondyle (medial epicondylectomy). Each procedure has purported benefits and also potential complications. Simple in-situ release has the benefit of shorter operative times and less surgical dissection, however, the nerve may subluxate post-operatively and cause persistent pain. Procedures to move the nerve (subcutaneous transposition, sub-fascial transposition, sub muscular transposition) prevent subluxation and take tension off the nerve, however, they require more dissection, larger incisions, and also partially devascularize the nerve. Medial epicondylectomy prevents subluxation and decompresses the nerve, but some patients may have a prolonged recovery and persistent pain from removing part of the bone.
The purpose of this study is to prospective evaluate patients undergoing cubital tunnel release according to the standard practice and preference of their surgeon. The investigators plan to compare the different techniques at standard post-operative intervals.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Objective:
The purpose of this study is to compare different techniques for cubital tunnel release.
Specific Aims:
- Determine if there are differences in patient-directed outcomes scores between different techniques used for cubital tunnel release.
- Determine if there are differences in post-operative pain scores between different techniques used for cubital tunnel release.
- Determine if there are differences in objective measurements such as range of motion and grip strength scores between different techniques used for cubital tunnel release.
- Determine if there are differences in complications between different techniques used for cubital tunnel release.
Background:
Compression of the ulnar nerve at the elbow (cubital tunnel syndrome) is the second most common compressive neuropathy of the upper extremity (carpal tunnel is the most common). Patients who fail conservative treatment (activity modification, splinting, medications) are offered cubital tunnel release. There are multiple techniques to decompress the ulnar nerve at the elbow, but the ideal release has not been determined. These techniques vary from simple decompression of the nerve (in-situ release, endoscopic release), to decompressing the nerve and moving it anteriorly to take tension off the nerve (subcutaneous transposition, sub-fascial transposition, sub muscular transposition), and removing part of the medial epicondyle (medial epicondylectomy). Each procedure has purported benefits and also potential complications. Simple in-situ release has the benefit of shorter operative times and less surgical dissection, however, the nerve may subluxate post-operatively and cause persistent pain. Procedures to move the nerve (subcutaneous transposition, sub-fascial transposition, sub muscular transposition) prevent subluxation and take tension off the nerve, however, they require more dissection, larger incisions, and also partially devascularize the nerve. Medial epicondylectomy prevents subluxation and decompresses the nerve, but some patients may have a prolonged recovery and persistent pain from removing part of the bone.
Significance:
The results of this study may provide a high level of evidence to determine if specific techniques for cubital tunnel decompression result in improved patient outcomes and/or fewer complications.
Study Type
Study Type
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Sampling Method
Study Population
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- patients indicated to surgery by attending surgeon
Exclusion Criteria:
- previous cubital tunnel release on ipsilateral side
- unable/unwilling to provide consent
- pregnant women
- prisoners
- < 18 years of age
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Observational Models: Cohort
- Time Perspectives: Prospective
Number of groups / cohorts
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / CohortGroup / Cohort |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Patients undergoing cubital tunnel release surgery
Patients undergoing cubital tunnel release surgery will be enrolled.
All enrolled subjects will be followed regardless of the technique used by surgeon.
|
Patients undergoing cubital tunnel release for ulnar nerve compression at elbow
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Patient rated ulnar nerve evaluation (PRUNE) score
Time Frame: 1 year
|
The PRUNE is a validated patient rated outcome measurement to assess pain, symptoms and functional disability in patients with ulnar nerve compression at the elbow.
|
1 year
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Elbow Range of Motion
Time Frame: 1 year
|
The elbow range of motion will be measured in degrees.
|
1 year
|
|
Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for Pain
Time Frame: 1 year
|
The VAS for pain is a patient-reported single-item scale with scores ranging 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain).
|
1 year
|
|
2 Point Discrimination Test
Time Frame: 1 year
|
The test will measure, in millimeters, the ability of a patient to determine discern the difference between two points when 2 separate instruments are touched to the skin.
|
1 year
|
|
Hand Dynamometer to measure Grip Strength
Time Frame: 1 year
|
The Hand Dynamometer is a simple hand-held device when squeezed, will report grip strength in kgs.
|
1 year
|
|
Number of subjects with post-surgical complications
Time Frame: 1 year
|
The presence or absence of post-surgical complications will be recorded for each subject.
|
1 year
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- MacDermid JC, Grewal R. Development and validation of the patient-rated ulnar nerve evaluation. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013 Apr 26;14:146. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-146.
- Palmer BA, Hughes TB. Cubital tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am. 2010 Jan;35(1):153-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2009.11.004.
- Osei DA, Padegimas EM, Calfee RP, Gelberman RH. Outcomes following modified oblique medial epicondylectomy for treatment of cubital tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am. 2013 Feb;38(2):336-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.11.006. Epub 2013 Jan 3.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- PRO15040063
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Cubital Tunnel Syndrome
-
NCT06117501Active, not recruitingRecurrent Cubital Tunnel Syndrome | Recalcitrant Cubital Tunnel Syndrome
-
NCT07496398RecruitingCubital Tunnel Syndrome | Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) | Peripheral Neuropathy Pain
-
NCT07102992CompletedPost Burn Cubital Tunnel Syndrome Response to High Intensity Laser Therapy Versus Shock Wave TherapyPost Burn Cubital Tunnel Syndrome
-
NCT02739945CompletedUlnar Nerve Compression, Cubital Tunnel
-
NCT05395715RecruitingElectrical Stimulation | Cubital Tunnel Syndrome
-
NCT01394822CompletedSciatic Neuropathy | Carpal Tunnel Syndrome | Median Neuropathy | Cubital Tunnel Syndrome | Radial Neuropathy | Tibial Neuropathy | Ulnar Neuropathy | Focal Neuropathies | Peroneal Neuropathy
-
NCT04470245UnknownCubital Tunnel Syndrome
Clinical Trials on Cubital tunnel release
-
NCT02739945CompletedUlnar Nerve Compression, Cubital Tunnel
-
NCT04647058WithdrawnUlnar Neuropathies | Cubital Tunnel Syndrome | Ulnar Nerve Entrapment at Elbow | Ulnar Nerve Compression | Ulnar Nerve Palsy | Ulnar Nerve Entrapment | Ulnar Nerve Entrapment Syndrome | Ulnar Claw
-
NCT00880295CompletedCarpal Tunnel Syndrome
-
NCT00435071TerminatedCarpal Tunnel Syndrome
-
NCT07594821Recruiting
-
NCT06902831Completed
-
NCT01972165Completed
-
NCT06114823CompletedCarpal Tunnel Syndrome | Incision
-
NCT02500355Completed
-
NCT05431101RecruitingCarpal Tunnel Syndrome | Wound Infection | Suture, Complication