Cubital tunnel release with Wide Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) technique in an outpatient setting is safe and effective.

Ulnar nerve release is often performed under general anaesthesia. Wide Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) is a new anaesthetic method increasingly used by hand surgeons in an outpatient setting. It has advantages such as the possibility to shift surgical interventions out of the regular surgical theatre settings into an outpatient clinical setting, no risk of complications or side effects resulting from regional and general anesthesia and decreased costs. The use of WALANT has not been investigated extensively in elbow surgery. This study aims to evaluate clinical outcomes after ulnar nerve release under WALANT 27 patients with ulnar nerve release for cubital tunnel syndrome were included. The primary outcome was the presence of (remaining) symptoms after ulnar nerve release. Data was extracted from medical records. 13 out of 27 patients had (mild) remaining symptoms after ulnar nerve release, and 1 complication (superficial wound infection) was seen. Ulnar nerve release under WALANT is safe and effective in patients with primary ulnar nerve entrapment that have failed conservative therapy.

Volumetric assessment of ulnar nerves in cubital tunnel syndrome with 3D modeling of the MRI and its relationship with electrodiagnostic findings.

BACKGROUND: Thickened nerve cross-sectional areas (CSA) have been investigated in compressive neuropathy, but the longitudinal extent of nerve swelling has yet to be evaluated. We did a volumetric assessment of the ulnar nerve in cubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS) with three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) modeling and investigated this relationship with clinical and electrodiagnostic parameters. METHODS: We compared 40 CuTS patient elbow MRIs to 46 patient elbow MRIs with lateral elbow epicondylitis as controls. The ulnar nerve was modeled with Mimics software and was assessed qualitatively and quantitatively. The CSA and ulnar nerve volumes were recorded, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated for diagnostic performance. We analyzed clinical and electrodiagnostic parameters to investigate their relationship with the 3D ulnar nerve parameters. RESULTS: For the diagnosis of CuTS, the area under the curve value was 0.915 for the largest CSA and 0.910 for the volume in the ROC curve. The optimal cut-off was 14.53 mm2 and 529 mm3 respectively. When electrodiagnostic parameters were investigated, the 3D ulnar nerve volume was significantly inversely associated with motor conduction velocity, although there was no association between the largest CSA and any of the electrodiagnostic parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The 3D ulnar nerve volume, which is an integration or multilevel measurement of CSAs, showed diagnostic usefulness similar to CSA, but it correlated better with conduction velocity, indicating demyelination or early-to-moderate nerve damage in CuTS.

Force loss and distribution of load in the hands of patients with cubital tunnel syndrome.

Manugraphy with three different cylinder sizes was used to quantify the contribution of fingers, thumb and palm to grip force in patients with unilateral cubital tunnel syndrome. Forces in the affected and contralateral hands differed by up to 29%. Although grip force is usually maximal when gripping small handles, ulnar nerve palsy resulted in similar absolute grip forces using the 100-mm and 200-mm cylinders. The contact area between the affected hand and the cylinders was reduced by 5%-9%. We noted a high correlation between the contact area and grip force, visible atrophy and permanently impaired sensibility. The load distribution differed significantly between both hands for all cylinder sizes. When gripping large objects, the main functional impairment in cubital tunnel syndrome is weakness in positioning and stabilizing the thumb. Weak intrinsic finger muscles are responsible for loss of force when gripping small objects. Level of evidence: III.

Recurrence of ulnar tunnel syndrome: Long-term clinical and functional results of surgical management using revision neurolysis and subcutaneous anterior transposition.

OBJECTIVE: Recurrence after primary ulnar tunnel syndrome surgery is observed in 1.4%-25% of patients. However, the outcome of revision surgery is uncertain and limited. This study aimed to assess the clinical and functional outcomes of neurolysis combined with anterior subcutaneous transposition in cases of recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective single-center study included patients who were operated on for iterative ulnar tunnel syndrome at the elbow between January 1996 and December 2020, with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Demographic data, pre- and post-operative clinical evaluations, surgical details, and satisfaction levels were collected. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were reviewed. Mean follow-up was 11.7 years (range, 2.1-26.4 years). The secondary procedure led to significant improvement in mean Quick-DASH score, from 25.3 (range, 11-50) to 20.0 (range, 11-49) (p = 0.023), with a satisfaction rate of 78.5%. Symptoms of pain (p = 0.033), amyotrophy (p = 0.013), hypoesthesia (p < 0.01), and paresthesia (p < 0.001) also showed significant improvement. There were 7 cases of failure (25.0%). CONCLUSION: The combination of neurolysis and anterior subcutaneous transposition was a reliable technique, improving clinical outcome in recurrent ulnar tunnel syndrome after previous surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV - retrospective study.

Evaluation of Different Surgical Techniques for Revision Cubital Tunnel Release: A Meta-Analysis of Patient-Reported Symptoms.

PURPOSE: Controversy exists regarding the best option for revision surgery in refractory cubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS). The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of revision surgery and determine the optimal surgical approach for patients requiring revision surgery for CuTS. METHODS: A literature search was conducted. Characteristics of the included studies were summarized descriptively. The risk ratio between patient-reported preoperative and postoperative outcomes relating to pain, motor, and sensory deficits was calculated. A meta-regression analysis was performed to evaluate the postoperative symptom improvements based on the type of secondary surgery. Random-effects meta-analysis and descriptive statistics were used when appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 471 patients were evaluated in 20 studies. In total, 254 (53.9%) male and 217 (46.1%) female patients, with an average age of 49.2 ± 14.1 years, were included in this study. Pain was the most common symptom (n = 346, 81.6%), followed by sensory and motor dysfunction in 342 (80.6%) and 223 (52.6%) patients, respectively. Meta-analysis comparing preoperative and postoperative symptoms between patients who had submuscular transposition (SMT), subcutaneous transposition (SCT), and neurolysis showed that a significant subgroup difference exists between the types of revision surgery in sensory and motor improvements. Meta-regression showed that SMT was associated with better outcomes compared with SCT in motor and sensory improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Revision surgery for CuTS can be useful for addressing recurrent and persistent symptoms. Compared with neurolysis and SCT, SMT seems to be the superior option for revision surgery, demonstrating substantial improvement in all symptom domains. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

CUBITAL TUNNEL SYNDROME DUE TO AN INTRANEURAL GANGLION CYST OF THE ULNAR NERVE.

Cubital tunnel syndrome is the second most common neuropathy of the upper extremity. Cubital tunnel syndrome caused by intraneural ganglion cysts is rare in clinical practice. We present the case of a 71-year-old male patient with a 4-month history of cubital tunnel syndrome of the left elbow due to an intraneural ganglion cyst. After revision of the ulnar nerve and resection of the intraneural cyst nearly complete recovery was achieved within a 5 month follow-up but some sensory deficits of the fifth fingertip. We recommend preoperative ultrasound examination of the cubital tunnel even in cases with clear diagnosis. Ganglion cyst as a cause of cubital tunnel is rare but needs to be diagnosed and treated as soon as possible to prevent irreversible complications.

Diagnosis of Ulnar Neuropathy at the Elbow Using Ultrasound - A Comparison to Electrophysiologic Studies.

PURPOSE: Given the relatively high false negative rate of electrodiagnostic studies (EDX) in patients with clinically diagnosed ulnar neuropathy at the elbow (UNE), we sought to determine whether an alternative objective test could more effectively detect UNE. Additionally, we proposed to determine the relationship between the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the ulnar nerve on ultrasound (US), EDX, and clinical symptoms. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients presenting with symptomatic UNE. The performance characteristics of EDX versus ultrasound were calculated using the clinical diagnosis of UNE as the reference standard. Standard EDX studies and US of the ulnar nerve were analyzed. Maximal CSA of the ulnar nerve and EDX severity were analyzed for patients with each combination of US-positive/negative and EDX-positive/negative findings. RESULTS: Analysis was performed on 89 patients and 115 nerves with signs and symptoms of cubital tunnel syndrome. In total, 56 (49%) nerves were diagnosed as mild UNE, 32 (28%) nerves were diagnosed as moderate UNE, 17 (15%) nerves were diagnosed as severe UNE, and 10 (8%) nerves were negative for UNE by EDX. Maximal-maximal CSA was highly correlated with disease severity as determined by nerve conduction studies/electromyography. Compared with EDX+/US+, patients with EDX-/US+ showed higher rates of ulnar sensory loss and elbow tenderness with similar rates of positive Tinel and intrinsic muscle atrophy. In this sample of patients with clinically diagnosed UNE, 91.3% of the patients demonstrated positive EDX studies, whereas 94.8% had a positive US. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound is an alternative to EDX that could be incorporated clinically in the diagnosis and management of UNE. Ultrasound was able to consistently detect clinically positive cubital tunnel syndrome demonstrating its utility as a confirmatory or supplemental test to the clinical assessment if one is required. Ultrasound additionally may be able to better identify patients with early stages of UNE with negative EDX findings. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic IV.

Comparison of in-situ release and submuscular anterior transposition of ulnar nerve for refractory cubital tunnel syndrome, previously treated with subfascial anterior transfer-A retrospective study of 24 cases.

BACKGROUND: Although cubital tunnel syndrome is the second most common type of compressive neuropathy in the upper extremities, the indication and optimal surgical method for recurrent or refractory cubital tunnel syndrome remains controversial. This study evaluates the functional outcomes of revision surgery for cubital tunnel syndrome. MATERIAL & METHODS: This study was a retrospective observational multicenter single-institution study including 660 patients who underwent surgery for cubital tunnel syndrome from 2010 to 2019. Among the 660 patients, 42(6.4%) received revision surgery due to remaining or recurrent symptoms confirmed with electromyography(EMG). After excluding those with concurrent elbow fracture, dislocation, osteoarthritis and wound infection, a total of 24 patients were included in the study. The patients were evaluated of disease severity, revision surgical method, time interval to recurrence, underlying diseases and postoperative functional outcomes. RESULTS: All patients received ulnar nerve subfascial anterior transposition for the initial cubital tunnel syndrome surgery. Among the 24 patients (3.7%) who received revision surgery, nine received in situ neurolysis, 12 received submuscular transposition, and three received subcutaneous transfer. 21 patients (88%) reported improved mean VAS score of 4.3, while three patients complained of remaining symptoms that did not improve even after revision surgery. The patients with remaining symptoms all had underlying diabetes mellitus and were treated with subcutaneous transfer. The difference of surgical outcomes between the in situ neurolysis group and the nerve transfer groups were non-significant (p = 0.23). The most common cause of recurrent or persistent symptoms was adhesion and fibrosis at sling area. The mean follow up period before revision surgery was 26.3 months and postoperative follow up period after revision surgery was 8.5 months. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of this study imply that in-situ neurolysis may be as effective as anterior submuscular transfer of ulnar nerve for refractory cubital tunnel syndrome after anterior subfascial transfer.

The prevalence of double- and multiple crush syndromes in patients surgically treated for peripheral nerve compression in the upper limb.

OBJECTIVE: The double crush syndrome describes a condition characterized by multifocal entrapment of a nerve. In the upper limb, the high prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome makes it a common diagnosis of assumption in the setting of median neuropathy. More proximal compressions may tend to be overlooked, under-diagnosed and under-treated in the population. This study aims to map the prevalence of peripheral upper limb nerve compressions among patients undergoing peripheral nerve decompression. METHODS: A prospective case series was conducted on 183 patients undergoing peripheral nerve decompression in a private hand surgery clinic. Level(s) of nerve compression in the median, ulnar and radial nerves were determined by history and physical examination. The prevalence of each nerve compression syndrome or combination of syndromes was analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 320 upper limbs in 183 patients were analyzed. A double crush of the median nerve at the levels of the lacertus fibrosus and carpal tunnel was identified in 78% of upper limbs with median neuropathy, whereas isolated lacertus syndrome and carpal tunnel syndrome were present in only 5% and 17% of affected limbs respectively. Cubital tunnel syndrome affected 12.5% of upper limbs, and 80% of these had concomitant lacertus and carpal tunnel syndromes, compared to only 7.5% with isolated cubital tunnel syndrome. CONCLUSION: A high prevalence should prompt clinicians towards more routine assessment for double crush syndrome to avoid misdiagnosis, inadequate treatment, recurrence, and revision surgeries.

A 10-Year Update of Outcome Measures Used to Assess Results After Surgery for Cubital Tunnel Syndrome: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

HYPOTHESIS: Outcomes reporting for the surgical release of ulnar nerve cubital tunnel entrapment have variability in subjective, objective, and validated measures. The aim of this study is to review the literature to reassess the measures used to report surgical outcomes for ulnar neurolysis at the elbow. METHODS: This study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines on systematic reviews. Six electronic databases were queried from the past 10 years using specific search terms and Boolean operators. Two independent reviewers assessed 4290 unique titles and abstracts that were screened for inclusion criteria. Sixty-eight full text articles were included for analysis. RESULTS: Statistical significance was noted in the number of outcome measures reported between studies from journals of impact factor within the first and third quartiles (P = 0.0086) and first and fourth quartiles (P = 0.0247), although no significance exists in the number of cubital tunnel-specific measures based on impact factor (P = 0.0783). Seventy-nine percent (n = 54) of the included studies report subjective measures; 54% (n = 37) included objective measures. Seventy percent (n = 48) of the studies report disease-specific outcome measures. CONCLUSION: There exists a discordance within the literature regarding the most appropriate, descriptive, and translational measures for reporting surgical outcomes of cubital tunnel syndrome. We recommend journal editors implement a requirement that authors reporting outcomes of ulnar nerve decompression must use a standard, validated measure to make comparisons across the literature universal. Furthermore, a minimum of at least 1 subjective and 1 objective measure should be standard.

Compression Neuropathies: Revisions and Managing Expectations.

Most compression neuropathies can be reliably treated with surgical decompression; however, in approximately 25% of the cases, this release fails, requiring revision surgery. Defining the correct diagnosis after a failed nerve decompression (ie, persistent, recurrent, or new symptoms) is of the utmost importance and guides toward the optimal treatment. This article describes the clinical categorization of secondary carpal tunnel syndrome and cubital tunnel syndrome, intraoperative principles of revision surgery and treatment options that are currently available.

Endoscopic Versus Open Carpal Tunnel Surgery: Risk Factors and Rates of Revision Surgery.

PURPOSE: The purpose of our study was to compare the 1-year revision surgery rates and outcomes of open versus endoscopic carpal tunnel release. Our hypothesis was that, compared to open release, endoscopic carpal tunnel release was an independent risk factor for revision surgery within 1-year. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 4338 patients undergoing isolated endoscopic or open carpal tunnel release. Demographic data, medical comorbidities, surgical approach, need for revision surgery, hand dominance, history of prior injection, and Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System upper extremity (UE), pain interference (PI) and physical function scores were analyzed. Multivariable analysis was used to identify the risk factors for revision surgery within one year of the index procedure. RESULTS: In total, 3280 patients (76%) underwent open and 1058 (24%) underwent endoscopic carpal tunnel release. Within one year of the index procedure, 45 patients required revision carpal tunnel release. The average time to revision was 143 days. The rate of revision carpal tunnel release in the open group was 0.71% compared to 2.08% in the endoscopic group. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that endoscopic surgery, male sex, cubital tunnel syndrome, tobacco use, and diabetes were associated independently with revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that endoscopic carpal tunnel release was associated independently with a 2.96 times greater likelihood of requiring revision carpal tunnel release within one year, compared to open carpal tunnel release. Male sex, concurrent cubital tunnel syndrome, tobacco use, and diabetes also were associated independently with greater risk of needing revision carpal tunnel release within one year. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic II.

Misdiagnosis in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis.

The symptoms of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) can mimic those of compressive neuropathies, such as carpal and cubital tunnel syndromes, especially early in a patient's clinical course. We surveyed members of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand and found that 11% of active and retired members have performed nerve decompression surgeries on patients later diagnosed with ALS. Hand surgeons are commonly the first providers to evaluate patients with undiagnosed ALS. As such, it is important to be aware of the history, signs, and symptoms of ALS to provide an accurate diagnosis and prevent unnecessary morbidities, such as nerve decompression surgery, which invariably results in poor outcomes. The major "red flag" symptoms warranting further work-up include weakness without sensory symptoms, profound weakness and atrophy in multiple nerve distributions, progressively bilateral and global symptoms, presence of bulbar symptoms (such as tongue fasciculations and speech/swallowing difficulties), and, if surgery is performed, failure to improve. If any of these red flags are present, we recommend neurodiagnostic testing and prompt referral to a neurologist for further work-up and treatment.

Endoscopic Release of the Ulnar Nerve at the Elbow: Technique Description and Case Series / Liberação endoscópica do nervo ulnar no cotovelo: Descrição da técnica e série de casos

Abstract Objective The endoscopic release of the ulnar nerve reproduces a simple (in situ) procedure with smaller incisions, less soft tissue damage, and higher preservation of nerve vascularization. Endoscopy allows the clear visualization of the entire path of the nerve and surrounding noble structures. Moreover, it reveals any signs of compression and allows a safe release of 10cm distally or proximally to the medial epicondyle. Methods A retrospective survey revealed that 15 subjects (1 with a bilateral injury) underwent an ulnar nerve compression release at the elbow using the endoscopic technique with Agee (Micro-Aire Sugical Instruments, Charlottesville, VA, EUA) equipment from January 2016 to January 2020. Results Symptoms of ulnar nerve compression improved in all patients; on average, they resumed their work activities in 26.5 days. There was no recurrence or need for another procedure. In addition, there were no severe procedure-related complications, such as infection and nerve or vascular injury. One patient had transient paresthesia of the sensory branches to the forearm, with complete functional recovery in 8 weeks. Conclusion Our study shows that the endoscopic release of the ulnar nerve at the elbow with the Agee equipment is a safe, reliable technique with good outcomes.

Resumo Objetivo A liberação endoscópica do nervo ulnar permite reproduzir uma liberação simples (in situ), mas através de incisões menores e com menor lesão de partes moles e uma maior preservação da vascularização do nervo. A visualização clara através da endoscopia permite observar todo o trajeto do nervo e das estruturas nobres circundantes, mostrando os sinais de compressão, possibilitando realizar a liberação de forma segura em um trajeto de 10 cm nos sentidos distal e proximal ao epicôndilo medial. Método Foram encontrados, de forma retrospectiva, no período entre janeiro de 2016 e janeiro de 2020, 15 pacientes (sendo 1 com lesão bilateral) submetidos a liberação da compressão do nervo ulnar no cotovelo pela técnica endoscópica com equipamento de Agee (Micro-Aire Sugical Instruments, Charlottesville, VA, EUA). Resultados Todos os pacientes tiveram melhora dos sintomas de compressão do nervo ulnar e o período de retorno ao trabalho foi de em média 26,5 dias. Não houve recidivas e não houve a necessidade de outro procedimento. Também não houve complicações graves decorrentes do procedimento, como infecção, lesão nervosa ou vascular. Em um paciente, houve parestesia transitória dos ramos sensitivos para o antebraço, com retorno completo da função em 8 semanas. Conclusão Os resultados mostram que a liberação endoscópica do nervo ulnar no cotovelo comoequipamentodeAgeeéuma técnica segura, confiável e com bons resultados.

Computerized adaptive testing for the patient evaluation measure (PEM) in patients undergoing cubital tunnel syndrome surgery.

In outcome measures, item response theory (IRT) validation can deliver interval-scaled high-quality measurement that can be harnessed using computerized adaptive tests (CATs) to pose fewer questions to patients. We aimed to develop a CAT by developing an IRT model for the Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM) for patients undergoing cubital tunnel syndrome (CuTS) surgery. Nine hundred and seventy-nine completed PEM responses of patients with CuTS in the United Kingdom Hand Registry were used to develop and calibrate the CAT. Its performance was then evaluated in a simulated cohort of 1000 patients. The CAT reduced the original PEM length from ten to a median of two questions (range two to four), while preserving a high level of precision (median standard error of measurement of 0.27). The mean error between the CAT score and full-length score was 0.08%. A Bland-Altman analysis showed good agreement with no signs of bias. The CAT version of the PEM can substantially reduce patient burden while enhancing construct validity by harnessing IRT for patients undergoing CuTS surgery.

Intraoperative electrical stimulation promotes the short-term recovery of patients with cubital tunnel syndrome after surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to investigate whether intraoperative electrical nerve stimulation has effects on the short-term recovery of cubital tunnel syndrome patients after ulnar nerve release. METHODS: Patients diagnosed as cubital tunnel syndrome were selected. At the same time, they received conventional surgery treatment. The patients were divided by a randomized digits table into two groups. The control group underwent conventional surgery, and the electrical stimulation (ES) group underwent intraoperative electrical stimulation. All the patients were tested for sensory and motor functions, grip strength, key pinch strength, motor conductivity velocity (MCV), and maximum compound muscle action potential (CMAP) before operation and 1 month and 6 months after operation. RESULTS: In patients treated with intraoperative ES, the sensory and motor functions and the strength of muscle were significantly improved after 1-month and 6-month follow-up than the control group. After the follow-up, the patients in the ES group had significantly higher grip strength and key pinch strength than the control group. After the follow-up, the patients in the ES group had significantly higher MCV and CMAP than the control group. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative electrical stimulation of nerve muscle can significantly promote the short-term recovery of nerve and muscle functions after the surgery in cubital tunnel syndrome patients.

What Factors Are Associated With Revision Cubital Tunnel Release Within 3 Years?

BACKGROUND: It has been shown that patient demographics such as age, payer factors such as insurance type, clinical characteristics such as preoperative opioid use, and disease grade but not surgical procedure are associated with revision surgery to treat cubital tunnel syndrome. However, prior studies evaluating factors associated with revision surgery after primary cubital tunnel release have been relatively small and have involved patients from a single institution or included only a single payer. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What percentage of patients who underwent cubital tunnel release underwent revision within 3 years? (2) What factors are associated with revision cubital tunnel release within 3 years of primary cubital tunnel release? METHODS: We identified all adult patients who underwent primary cubital tunnel release from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2017, in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database using Current Procedural Terminology codes. We chose this database because it includes all payers and nearly all facilities in a large geographic area where cubital tunnel release may be performed. We used Current Procedural Terminology modifier codes to determine the laterality of primary and revision procedures. The mean age of the cohort overall was 53 ± 14 years, 43% (8490 of 19,683) were women, and 73% (14,308 of 19,683) were non-Hispanic White. The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database organization does not include a listing of all state residents and thus does not allow for censoring of patients who move out of state. All patients were followed for 3 years. We developed a multivariable hierarchical logistic regression model to model factors independently associated with revision cubital tunnel release within 3 years. Key explanatory variables included age, gender, race or ethnicity, insurance, patient residential location, medical comorbidities, concomitant procedures, whether the procedure was unilateral or bilateral, and year. The model also controlled for facility-level random effects to account for the clustering of observations among these entities. RESULTS: The risk of revision cubital tunnel release within 3 years of the primary procedure was 0.7% (141 of 19,683). The median time to revision cubital tunnel release was 448 days (interquartile range 210 to 861 days). After controlling for patient-level covariates and facility random effects, and compared with their respective counterparts, the odds of revision surgery were higher for patients with workers compensation insurance (odds ratio 2.14 [95% confidence interval 1.38 to 3.32]; p < 0.001), a simultaneous bilateral index procedure (OR 12.26 [95% CI 5.93 to 25.32]; p < 0.001), and those who underwent submuscular transposition of the ulnar nerve (OR 2.82 [95% CI 1.35 to 5.89]; p = 0.006). The odds of revision surgery were lower with increasing age (OR 0.79 per 10 years [95% CI 0.69 to 0.91]; p < 0.001) and a concomitant carpal tunnel release (OR 0.66 [95% CI 0.44 to 0.98]; p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The risk of revision cubital tunnel release was low. Surgeons should be cautious when performing simultaneous bilateral cubital tunnel release and when performing submuscular transposition in the setting of primary cubital tunnel release. Patients with workers compensation insurance should be informed they are at increased odds for undergoing subsequent revision cubital tunnel release within 3 years. Future work may seek to better understand whether these same effects are seen in other populations. Future work might also evaluate how these and other factors such as disease severity could affect functional outcomes and the trajectory of recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.