Preservation of terminal branches of the palmar cutaneous branch of the median nerve in open carpal tunnel release
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Post-operative pain in the palm and scar area is the most common complication after carpal tunnel release and injury to the terminal branches of the palmar cutaneous nerve is generally considered one of the causes for this complication. The Authors performed an intraoperative study preserving the terminal branches of the palmar cutaneous branch of the median nerve and verifying the frequency, location and direction of the branches that cross an interthenar incision. METHOD AND MATERIAL: Eighty-five consecutive patients (57 F - 28 M, mean age 66 y) underwent carpal tunnel release between February and June 2021. The cutaneous branches crossing the incision were identified and preserved by careful dissection. Subsequently they were counted and classified by their direction and distance from the proximal border of the transverse carpal ligament. RESULTS: Sensory branches were found in 40 % of cases (34/85) and their origin was observed at an average of 1.05 cm (0-1.8 cm) distal from the proximal border of the carpal tunnel. A total of 44 branches were observed of which 23 branches crossed the incision with a transverse course and 21 with an oblique, generally proximal-distal radio-ulnar course. The subcutaneous layer overlying the distal third of the transverse carpal ligament was found to be devoid of sensory branches, therefore it can be considered a relatively safe area. CONCLUSION: Isolation and protection of palmar sensory branches is important for improving carpal tunnel release results. This goal can be more easily achieved by locating the skin incision on the distal third of the transverse carpal ligament, where the sensory branches have a lower frequency, possibly associated with a second proximal incision (biportal technique) to better visualize the proximal portion of the ligament and antebrachial fascia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".