Does it Matter the Volume of Injectate on the Outcome of Ultrasound-guided Perineural Injection for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

December 7, 2025 updated by: Osama Kamal Abdullah Mohamed, Assiut University

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is an entrapment neuropathy affecting the median nerve with a lifetime prevalence of about 8% in the adult population. Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) occurs with the symptoms of intermittent nocturnal paresthesia and dysesthesia, followed by loss of sensation, weakness, and thenar muscle atrophy in later stages.

Although the etiology of CTS is multifactorial, compression of the median nerve in a space-limited osteofibrous canal at wrist level was proposed.

The gold standard of diagnosis is electrophysiological study, but ultrasonography was applied in recent decades for a better approach to the morphology change of the median nerve.Nerve hydrodissection (HD) is a widely used technique that involves the injection of fluid to separate the nerve from the surrounding structures.

HD is now considered a novel approach for the treatment of CTS with safe and outstanding long-term effects. A potential benefit of HD is to release the pressure on the "free nerves supplying the main nerves," called "nervi nervorum." Early, the compression of the vasa nervorum would affect venous outflow, causing the accumulation of toxins in the affected part. Then, the lymphatic drainage, located outside the epineurium, would undergo compressive effects.

HD can also decrease the gliding resistance of the median nerve within the carpal tunnel, which is considered a principal patho-mechanical cause of nerve injury.

Hydrodissection HD of the entrapped median nerve is considered a safe and efficacious approach for treatment of mild to moderate CTS and could be offered to patients with severe CTS if surgery is refused or can't be done due to other medical comorbidities. The use of US-guided HD could improve symptom severity, functional status, and the US parameters of nerve entrapment. HD has a long-term efficacy outcome; 88.6% of patients reported an effective outcome, and this may vary according to the initial severity status.

Different types of injectants are available and studied, with no clear indication of use for each type. However, PRP, D5W, and HA were more efficient than NS as regards subjective and objective improvement. PRP and HA were more effective for long-term nerve recovery, while HA was preferred for the earliest response. So, we recommend making the choice based on every patient's severity scale and electrophysiological scales, which means that for patients with mild forms and severe pain.

Injection of a large volume could be a better option in order to dissect a larger area, provide a better environment for the nerve repair mechanisms, and release the vascular and neural compressive elements.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

35

Phase

  • Phase 4

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adult patients aged 20-80 years old 2. Patients diagnosed with idiopathic CTS. 3. Abnormal electrophysiological analysis showing mild to moderate CTS 4. Symptoms and signs including:

    1. pain or paraesthesia in the median nerve innervated area (at least two digits with such symptoms between the thumb and the 4th digit) for more than 6 months not responding to conservative management including (vitamin B complex, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, oral steroids, and/or night splint)
    2. positive Phalen test, Tinel sign, or flick sign
    3. The patient's initial examination was based on the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guideline recommendations prior to their inclusion and confirmed by nerve conduction studies

Exclusion Criteria:

  • 1- Age less than 20 years 2- severe CTS (abductor policies brevis muscle atrophy with distal latency time >6.5 MS).

    3- MN electrophysiology study revealing absent potentials. 4- its cross-sectional area (CSA) >15 mm2 by sonographic checkup. 5- previous surgery of carpal tunnel. 6- previous wrist injection within 3 months 7- history of peripheral nerve injuries (brachial plexopathy, cervical radiculopathy or thoracic outlet syndrome) 8- CTS due to systemic causes, for example, endocrinal and/or pregnancy, rheumatoid arthritis, gouty or psoriatic osteoarthritis.

    9- concurrent use of antihistaminic, or cortisone. 10- Participant refusal. 11- local infection. presence of coagulopathy, and/or allergy to the included medications were also points for patients' exclusion from the study

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Quadruple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Group A
wrists undergoing ultrasound guided perineural injection of 5 ml total volume of injectate (3ml dextrose 5% +1 ml Triamcinolone acetonide + 1 ml lidocaine 2%) for carpel tunnel syndrome
patients injected with 8ml dextrose 5%
patients injected with 3 ml dextrose 5%
patients injected with 1 ml Triamcinolone acetonide
patients injected with 1ml lidocaine 2%)
Active Comparator: Group B
wrists undergoing ultrasound guided perineural injection of 10 ml total volume of injectate (8 ml dextrose 5% +1 ml Triamcinolone acetonide + 1 ml lidocaine 2%) for carpel tunnel syndrome
patients injected with 8ml dextrose 5%
patients injected with 3 ml dextrose 5%
patients injected with 1 ml Triamcinolone acetonide
patients injected with 1ml lidocaine 2%)

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
the severity of pain in patients with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
Time Frame: 1 month
Pain assessment through the VAS was explained to the patient (through selection of the number that represents his/her pain with 0 = no pain, and 10 = worst pain
1 month

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

December 1, 2025

Primary Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

December 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 7, 2025

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 7, 2025

First Posted (Actual)

December 16, 2025

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

December 16, 2025

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

December 7, 2025

Last Verified

December 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

Yes

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

Yes

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 Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS)

Clinical Trials on Dextrose 5%

Subscribe