Abstract
Objective
Given the divergence of opinions on the need for complementary tests such as ultrasonography (US) and electroneuromyography (ENMG) for the diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), we aimed to elucidate which of them presents greater accuracy for the confirmation of the presence or not of this condition.
Methods
A total of 175 patients from a hand surgery outpatient clinic were clinically evaluated, and the results of clinical trials (Tinel, Phalen and Durkan), US (normal or altered), and ENMG (normal, mild, moderate and severe) were noted, crossed, and submitted to a statistical analysis to verify the agreement between them.
Results
with the sample had a mean age of 53 years, with a prevalence of female patients (159 cases). Of the patients with positive clinical test, 43.7% had normal US and 41.7% had no alterations on the ENMG. Negative results were found on the Tinel in 46.9%, on the Phalen in 47.4%, and on the Durkan in 39.7%. In the crossing between the results of the ENMG and those of the other diagnostic methods, there was little statistical agreement between them.
Conclusion
There was no agreement between the results of the clinical examinations, the US and the ENMG in the diagnosis of CTS, and there is no clinical or complementary examination for CTS that accurately determines the therapeutic approach. Level of Evidence IV, Case Series.
Keywords
electromyography; median neuropathy; paresthesia; carpal tunnel syndrome