The High-Resolution Ultrasonography and Electrophysiological Studies in Nerve Decompression for Ulnar Nerve Entrapment at the Elbow

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To discuss a combination of high-resolution ultrasound and electrophysiological examination in diagnosis and evaluation of ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow.

Method We retrospectively reviewed 20 healthy volunteers and 278 patients of ulnar nerve entrapment divided into three groups by McGowan grade, and we treated patients with subcutaneous or modified submuscular ulnar nerve transposition randomly. All the patients were followed for 2 years. The diagnosis and effects were confirmed by preoperative or postoperative cross-sectional area (CSA), motor conduction velocity (MCV), sensory conduction velocity, and nerve action potential (NAP).

Results Healthy volunteers and grade I patients had significant differences in CSA, MCV, and NAP; grade I, II, and III patients had significant differences in CSA, MCV, and NAP; all patients had significant differences in CSA, MCV, and NAP before and after operations.

Conclusion High-resolution ultrasound and electrophysiological examination can be used in diagnosis and evaluation of operations of ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow.

• References

• 1 Asamoto S, Böker DK, Jödicke A. Surgical treatment for ulnar nerve entrapment at the elbow. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2005; 45: 240-244 ; discussion 244–245
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Mitsionis GI, Manoudis GN, Paschos NK, Korompilias AV, Beris AE. Comparative study of surgical treatment of ulnar nerve compression at the elbow. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19: 513-519
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Baek GH, Kwon BC, Chung MS. Comparative study between minimal medial epicondylectomy and anterior subcutaneous transposition of the ulnar nerve for cubital tunnel syndrome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2006; 15: 609-613
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Yoon JS, Kim BJ, Kim SJ , et al. Ultrasonographic measurements in cubital tunnel syndrome. Muscle Nerve 2007; 36: 853-855
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Volpe A, Rossato G, Bottanelli M , et al. Ultrasound evaluation of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: correlation with electrophysiological studies. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2009; 48: 1098-1101
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Tang P, Nellans KW. Cubital tunnel syndrome-surgical treatment techniques. Oper Tech Orthopaed 2009; 19: 235-242
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Machida M, Usui T, Nagaoka T, Satoh K, Asai T, Itagaki T. [Electrophysiological diagnosis in ulnar nerve entrapment at elbow]. Nippon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi 1990; 64: 7-16
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Jia ZR, Shi X, Sun XR. Pathogenesis and electrodiagnosis of cubital tunnel syndrome. Chin Med J (Engl) 2004; 117: 1313-1316
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Volpe A, Rossato G, Bottanelli M , et al. Ultrasound evaluation of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: correlation with electrophysiological studies. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2009; 48: 1098-1101
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Wiesler ER, Chloros GD, Cartwright MS, Shin HW, Walker FO. Ultrasound in the diagnosis of ulnar neuropathy at the cubital tunnel. J Hand Surg Am 2006; 31: 1088-1093
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Yoon JS, Walker FO, Cartwright MS. Ultrasonographic swelling ratio in the diagnosis of ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Muscle Nerve 2008; 38: 1231-1235
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Practice parameter for electrodiagnostic studies in ulnar neuropathy at the elbow: summary statement. American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American Academy of Neurology, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Muscle Nerve 1999; 22: 408-411
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Apfelberg DB, Larson SJ. Dynamic anatomy of the ulnar nerve at the elbow. Plast Reconstr Surg 1973; 51: 79-81
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Craven Jr PR, Green DP. Cubital tunnel syndrome. Treatment by medial epicondylectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1980; 62: 986-989
  PubMedGoogle Scholar