MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W11889804 · doi:10.1177/229255030301100303

Early Major Complications of Endoscopic Carpal Tunnel Release: A Review of 1200 Cases

2003· review· en· W11889804 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Raymond Tse, Lawrence N. Hurst, Tawfeik Alyafi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plastic Surgery · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Nerve Disorders
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopic carpal tunnel releaseCarpal tunnel syndromeSurgeryCarpal tunnelCarpal tunnel releaseMedian nerveEndoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the early benefits of endoscopic carpal tunnel release have been demonstrated, there is great controversy regarding the risks and safety of the technique. The present study reports early major complications in a series of 1278 consecutive cases performed by a single surgeon over a seven-year period. All procedures were performed under local anaesthesia on an outpatient basis using the Agee single portal technique. Mean follow-up was three months. No vascular, tendon or permanent nerve injuries were documented. Recurrent or persistent symptoms occurred in 7% of patients for which 20 of 89 underwent subsequent open carpal tunnel release. No nerve injuries were found on re-exploration. Other complications were consistent with previously reported incidences. This is the largest reported case series by a single surgeon and represents an accumulation of surgical experience at the upper end of the learning curve. Endoscopic carpal tunnel release is a safe procedure in this experienced single surgeon series.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plastic SurgerySame topicPeripheral Nerve DisordersFrench-language works237,207