Somewhere amongst literature, I recall an advocate of creating a "fire-break" when doing (conventional) hand:
fasciotomy/fasciectomy. The inference is that releasing, severing, or surgically removing aponeurosses is one step.
Removing the source of the condition is another. In this scenario, a patient might have had a procedure that carefully disected the "chord" only to have a recurrence.
A second individual might have had the disection plus a
skin graft that introduced tissue without the DNA that
triggered the condition. The graft is referred to as a
"fire-break." It is akin to the California wildfires; i.e.,
create a safety zone by removing the fuel (DNA.)
Personally, NA sounds more reasonable in stages 1-3. I
raise this item only as a consideration about the results obtained by U.S. hand surgeons. Aggressive removal
of an aponeurosis might produce results that differ from
removal plus a hand graft (from groin tissue.) As lay
contributers we may not always offer a complete picture
or treatments rendered. Recupe time is extended for any
hand surgery. Caveat Emptor!