1. Bendler, E.M., Greenspun, B., Yu, J., Erdman II, W. “The bilaterality of Carpal tunnel syndrome.” Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1977; 58: 362-364.
Confirms the high incidence (>50%) of bilateral CTS. Negates the need for witch hunts to locate a systemic or cervical spine cause of bilateral symptoms consistent with CTS.
2. Birkbeck, M.Q., Beer, T.C, “Occupational relation to the carpal tunnel syndrome.” Rheumatology and Rehab, 1975; 218-221.
This was a poor retrospective survey of 658 patients treated for carpal tunnel syndrome, of which 45% occurred bilaterally with a ration of female to male of 3 to 1. Overall, this study added nothing useful to the medical literature on carpal tunnel syndrome except confirming the frequently cited 3 to 1 female to male incident and the high bilaterality of the problem. Their diagnosis was confirmed on median motor conduction studies only, i.e. this meant that the majority of them had long standing CTS by the time of diagnosis and treatment. Only 49% were treated definitively with surgery. Supposedly 79% were doing “repetitive hand movements” at work. They noted that of the 492 women in this survey, 28% gave knitting as their main hobby, and this accounted for 51% when non-employed housewives were considered separately. Without specific reason with which to make this conclusion, the author summarized that even light, but highly repetitive movements of the fingers and wrists are likely to produce changes that cause carpal tunnel syndrome. They failed to explain why there are 3 times as many women in their series and they had no control in their series, plus it was retrospective. Additionally, the issues related to the patient selection were not addressed.
3. Gossett, J.G., Chance, P.F., “Is there a familial carpal tunnel syndrome? An evaluation and literature review.” Muscle & Nerve, 1998; 21: 1533-1536.
They reviewed the reports of families proposed to have the familial carpal tunnel syndrome (FCTS). The demographic features of sporadic carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) differ from FCTS, where an earlier onset and increased bilateral involvement is seen. They also identify seven new potential FCTS pedigrees on the basis of their having four or more members with symptoms suggesting CTS. In all but two pedigrees an explanation other than FCTS was felt to be present. They conclude that the FCTS is a rare, but genetically distinct disorder.
4. Gray, R.G., Poppo, M.J., Gottlieb, N.L., “Primary familial bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome.” Annals Int Med, 1970;9:37-40.
Ties together many of the concepts of high bilaterality of CTS and strong genetic predisposition. Suggests this is specific subgroup of patients with CTS.
5. Pagnanelli, D.M. and Barrer, S.J. “Bilateral carpal tunnel release at one operation: Report of 228 Patients.” Neurosurgery, 1992; 31:6:1030-1034.
Proved the feasibility in performing bilateral open CTR in a large group of patients. Work comp status was not discussed.
6. Reinstein, L., “Hand dominance in carpal tunnel syndrome.” Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1981; 62: 202-203.
Slightly Greater incidence of CTS in the dominant vs. non dominant side as noted in many series of CTS with short follow up. One expects increased bilateral diagnosis with longer follow up.
7. Thomas, J.E., Lambert, E.H., and Cseuz, K.A. “Electrodiagnostic aspects of the carpal tunnel syndrome.” Arch Neurol, 1967; 16:635-641.
A Must Read! 35 years ago they noted signs of diffuse peripheral neuropathy manifested as multiple peripheral nerve entrapment even in the asymptomatic limbs of patients evaluated for CTS.
8. Wilson, K.M., Buehler, M.J., “Bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome in a normal child.” JHS, 1985; 10A: 246-248.
Nothing new, just a child with bilateral CTS. No way to blame CTS on work!