A Comparison of the Outcomes of Excision of the Fractured Hook of Hamate via a Carpal Tunnel Approach versus a Lateral Approach.

Background

The excision of the hook of the hamate is an accepted modality for the treatment of hook of hamate fractures. Three surgical approaches to the hook of hamate have been described in literature. This includes two palmar approaches namely the Guyon canal approach and the carpal tunnel approach, and the lateral approach. The aim of this article is to compare the outcomes of the carpal tunnel approach and the lateral approach.

Methods

Twenty-four patients with hook of hamate fractures were treated by excision of the hook of hamate. The hook of hamate was approached via the carpal tunnel in 15 patients and via the lateral approach in 9 patients. The outcomes with regard to duration of the surgery, complications such as pain, sensory disturbance and scar problems and time to return to sports were measured and analysed.

Results

There were no significant differences in outcomes between the carpal tunnel and the lateral approach for excision of hook of hamate fractures.

Conclusions

The outcomes of excision of the hook of hamate via the carpal tunnel approach and the lateral approach are similar. The decision to choose an approach should be based on the surgeon's familiarity with the approach. Future studies should include a comparison with the Guyon canal approach preferably in a homogenous group of patients. Level of Evidence: Level IV (Therapeutic).