Study	Reason for exclusion
Atroshi 2007	Not an RCT. Evaluation of the SF‐6D health utility index
Bal 2008	Not an RCT. Compared 2 mini skin incision techniques
Cellocco 2005	ECTR not involved. Mini‐open blind technique for carpal tunnel release (group A) compared with a limited open technique (group B)
Dimitriou 1997	Not an RCT
Flores 2005	Not an RCT. 2 groups of 15 participants underwent ECTR or conventional CTR
Futami 1995	Not an RCT. 10 participants with bilateral CTS underwent ECTR in one hand and conventional OCTR in the other
Hallock 1995	Not an RCT. 53 participants (71 hands) underwent OCTR using a minimal incision, which was comparable in composition to a group of 47 participants (66 hands) who had a 2‐portal ECTR
Katz 1994a	Not an RCT. Assessment of a global scoring system using data from an RCT (Brown 1993)
Katz 1994b	Not an RCT. Responsiveness of questionnaires, using data from an RCT (Brown 1993)
Lorgelly 2005	ECTR not involved. Evaluates the cost, effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery compared with conventional OCTR
Povlsen 1997	Not an RCT
Uchiyama 2002	Not an RCT. The first 33 consecutive patients (33 hands) subjected to ECTR were prospectively compared with the following 33 consecutive patients (33 hands), who were treated by OCTR
Uchiyama 2004	Not an RCT. ECTR or OCTR was performed based on participant preference
Vasiliadis 2010	Not an RCT. 37 underwent ECTR according to Chow and 35 were assigned to the open method
Worseg 1996	Not an RCT. 126 participants were enrolled in this study, 64 of them were treated endoscopically and 62 by OCTR
Zhao 2004	Not an RCT

ECTR: endoscopic carpal tunnel release; OCTR: open carpal tunnel release; RCT: randomised controlled trial.