Comparative Analysis of Median Nerve Parameters for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS) Diagnosis: Ultrasound vs. Nerve Conduction Study (NCS) This clinical study aims to determine whether ultrasound can be as practical as NCS in diagnosing CTS. It will also evaluate the accuracy of different median nerve measurements in both tests.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

Can ultrasound accurately detect CTS compared to NCS? Which median nerve measurements (such as size, speed, or function) are most useful for diagnosis? Researchers will compare ultrasound and NCS results in patients with CTS symptoms to determine which test is more reliable and patient-friendly.

Participants will:

1. Undergo both an ultrasound and a NCS for comparison.
2. Visit the clinic for testing and evaluation as part of the study.
3. Provide information about their symptoms and medical history related to CTS. This study aims to improve diagnosis accuracy and explore whether ultrasound could be a more comfortable and quicker alternative to NCS for detecting CTS.

This study aims to compare ultrasound and NCS for diagnosing CTS by analyzing key median nerve parameters in both tests. CTS is a common condition caused by compression of the median nerve at the wrist, leading to symptoms such as numbness, tingling, and weakness in the hand. Accurate diagnosis is essential to ensure appropriate treatment.

Currently, NCS is considered the standard test for CTS diagnosis, measuring nerve function by assessing conduction velocity and latency. However, ultrasound has emerged as a potential alternative by providing structural imaging of the median nerve, including parameters like cross-sectional area (CSA), echogenicity, and flattening ratio.

The primary objective of this study is to determine whether ultrasound can be a reliable, non-invasive, and patient-friendly alternative to NCS for CTS diagnosis. By comparing nerve measurements obtained from both methods, researchers aim to evaluate their diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.

Participants with suspected CTS will undergo both ultrasound and NCS for comparison. Data will be analyzed to determine which test provides the most precise and clinically useful information. The findings of this study may help refine diagnostic protocols, potentially reducing the need for NCS in certain cases and offering a faster, more comfortable option for patients.

Inclusion Criteria:

1. Adults aged 18 years or older.
2. Patients with clinical symptoms of CTS, including numbness, tingling, pain, or weakness in the hand.
3. Positive findings on clinical examination, such as Tinel's sign, Phalen's test, or Durkan's test.
4. Willingness to undergo both ultrasound and NCS for diagnostic evaluation.

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Previous surgery for CTS in the affected hand.
2. History of peripheral neuropathy such as diabetic neuropathy
3. Other neuromuscular disorders affecting the upper limb such as cervical radiculopathy.
4. Pregnant women.
5. Severe comorbid conditions that may interfere with study participation.
6. Inability to provide informed consent.

Following IPD will be shared

1. De-identified demographic data that is age, gender, relevant medical history.
2. Ultrasound measurements of the median nerve such as CSA and flattening ratio.
3. NCS results such as latency, conduction velocity and amplitude.
4. Clinical assessment findings such as Tinel's sign, Phalen's test results.

After the completion of study, data will be provided on demand and will be available for 6 months post completion.

Researchers will be given access. Data will be shared via email.