For Referring Doctors

Everything you need to know on the Micro-Invasive Procedure.

Why choose Micro-Invasive over Traditional Open Surgery?

  • Smaller Incision: Ultrasound-guided microinvasive CTR involves no incision compared to open surgery. This minimally invasive approach reduces tissue disruption, leading to less scarring and quicker recovery.

    Precision: The ultrasound allows the Doctor to visualise the carpal tunnel structures in real time, enabling highly precise cuts. This reduces the risk of damaging surrounding tissues such as nerves and blood vessels, which could occur in open surgery.

  • Faster Healing: Because the procedure is less invasive, patients generally experience less post-operative pain and a faster recovery time. This means that patients can return to their normal activities sooner, often within days or weeks, compared to several weeks or months for open surgery.

    Less Post-Op Pain: With smaller incisions and less tissue damage, post-operative pain is typically less severe. As a result, pain management needs are reduced, leading to a quicker return to normal activities.

  • Reduced Infection Risk: A smaller incision means less exposure of internal tissues to external contaminants, lowering the risk of infection.

    Less Nerve Damage: The real-time ultrasound guidance helps the surgeon avoid damaging important structures like the median nerve, which is the key nerve involved in carpal tunnel syndrome.

  • Local Anesthesia: Ultrasound-guided microinvasive CTR can often be performed under local anesthesia, whereas open surgery typically requires general anesthesia. This reduces the risks associated with anesthesia, such as nausea, dizziness, or adverse reactions. 

  • No Hospital Stay: Ultrasound-guided procedures are often done on an outpatient basis, meaning that the patient can go home the same day. This contrasts with traditional open surgery, which may require an overnight stay in the hospital.

  • Minimal Scarring: The small incision used in ultrasound-guided microinvasive CTR usually results in a better cosmetic outcome with less visible scarring than the larger scar that can result from open surgery.

  • Less Discomfort and Faster Recovery: The combination of less pain, faster healing, and fewer complications often leads to higher patient satisfaction. The procedure is quicker and involves fewer postoperative limitations on daily activities.

  • Dynamic Visualisation: Ultrasound allows the surgeon to see the anatomy in real time during the procedure, offering a level of feedback and accuracy that is not available during traditional surgery. This results in more controlled, accurate tissue release.

  • Lower Cost: Because it is a less invasive procedure, ultrasound-guided CTR can be less expensive than traditional surgery, particularly when considering the reduced need for hospital stays, anesthesia, and extended follow-up care.

Endoscopic vs Micro-invasive Procedures for Doctors

When considering carpal tunnel release (CTR), the ultrasound-guided microinvasive approach offers distinct advantages over the endoscopic method, especially when it comes to patient experience and outcomes. Here’s a breakdown of the key differences that highlight why ultrasound-guided micro-invasive CTR might be a better choice for patients.

    • Endoscopic Procedures: Use a flexible tube with a camera to examine and treat internal organs. Common in gastroenterology, respiratory, and urology.

    • Micro-invasive Procedures: Involve small incisions or no incisions, using tools like needles or catheters. Often used in orthopaedics, cardiology, and neurology.

    • Endoscopic: Real-time visual guidance, faster recovery, and reduced risk of infection.

    • Micro-invasive: Less tissue disruption, quicker recovery, minimal scarring, and often outpatient procedures.

    • Endoscopic: Ideal for colon cancer screening, biopsies, or GI disorders.

    • Micro-invasive: Used for herniated discs, coronary artery blockages, or varicose veins.

    • Endoscopic: Typically fast recovery, with most patients resuming normal activities in a day or two.

    • Micro-invasive: Rapid recovery, lower post-procedure pain compared to traditional surgery.

    • Endoscopic: Rare complications include bleeding, infection, or perforation. Requires specialized training.

    • Micro-invasive: Lower risk of complications but still includes potential for infection or nerve damage.

    • Endoscopic: Improved with high-definition imaging and robotics for better precision.

    • Micro-invasive: Advancements in lasers and robot-assisted procedures enhance safety and effectiveness.

    • Endoscopic: More cost-effective due to shorter hospital stays and reduced recovery times.

    • Micro-invasive: Higher upfront costs but may reduce long-term healthcare expenses due to fewer complications.

Studies on the effectiveness of the Micro-Invasive Procedure

  • Liu, Y., Liu, X., Liu, X., et al., 2023. Heterogeneity of the gut microbiome in patients with Crohn’s disease. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 133(9), e162036. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37790816/ [Accessed 10 January 2025].

  • Lu, R., Xiang, L., Yu, Z., et al., 2020. Gut microbiota dysbiosis in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and its correlation with clinical symptoms. Gut, 69(9), pp. 1795-1802. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32876476/ [Accessed 10 January 2025].

  • Zhai, Q., Li, X., Zhang, Y., et al., 2018. Gut microbiome in health and disease: From the perspective of gut microbiota in inflammatory bowel disease. Frontiers in Microbiology, 9, 441. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30402007/ [Accessed 10 January 2025].