No Difference in Reintervention at 1-Year Between Ultrasound-Guided versus Blind Dorsal Carpal Ganglion Aspiration

PurposeThe purpose of this retrospective comparative study was to compare the efficacy of dorsal carpal ganglion aspiration in patients who underwent either “blind” (using surface anatomy alone) or ultrasound-guided (US-guided) aspiration.MethodsOutcome measures were conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic via telephone for a minimum of 12 months after aspiration, with efficacy defined by reintervention with either repeat aspiration or surgical excision.ResultsData are reported for 141 patients (46 blind; 95 US-guided) at an average of 28 months (range, 12–55 months) from aspiration. Reintervention was not significantly different based on the mode of aspiration—26% and 24% for blind aspiration and US-guided, respectively. Patient-perceived recurrence was higher at 65% for the entire cohort. Patients who received steroid injection at the time of aspiration perceived lower rates of recurrence—44% versus 77% for patients who received a steroid injection and patients who did not, respectively.ConclusionsThis study found no significant difference between blind or US-guided aspiration in reintervention at a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Patients who received steroids at the time of aspiration perceived lower rates of recurrence.Type of study/level of evidenceTherapeutic III. The purpose of this retrospective comparative study was to compare the efficacy of dorsal carpal ganglion aspiration in patients who underwent either “blind” (using surface anatomy alone) or ultrasound-guided (US-guided) aspiration. Outcome measures were conducted during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic via telephone for a minimum of 12 months after aspiration, with efficacy defined by reintervention with either repeat aspiration or surgical excision. Data are reported for 141 patients (46 blind; 95 US-guided) at an average of 28 months (range, 12–55 months) from aspiration. Reintervention was not significantly different based on the mode of aspiration—26% and 24% for blind aspiration and US-guided, respectively. Patient-perceived recurrence was higher at 65% for the entire cohort. Patients who received steroid injection at the time of aspiration perceived lower rates of recurrence—44% versus 77% for patients who received a steroid injection and patients who did not, respectively. This study found no significant difference between blind or US-guided aspiration in reintervention at a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Patients who received steroids at the time of aspiration perceived lower rates of recurrence.