Oh Jae Yun, Kim Jin Soo, Lee Dong Chul, Yang Jae Won, Ki Sae Hwi, Jeon Byung Joon, Roh Si Young
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gwangmyeong Sung-Ae General Hospital, Gwangmyeong, Korea.
Arch Plast Surg. 2013 Nov;40(6):773-8. doi: 10.5999/aps.2013.40.6.773. Epub 2013 Nov 8.
In the management of mallet deformities, oblique retinacular ligament (ORL) reconstruction provides a mechanism for automatic distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint extension upon active proximal interphalangeal joint extension. The two variants of ORL reconstruction utilize either the lateral band or a free tendon graft. This study aims to compare these two surgical techniques and to assess any differences in functional outcome. As a secondary measure, the Mitek bone anchor and pull-in suture methods are compared.
A single-institutional retrospective review of ORL reconstruction was performed. The standard patient demographics, injury mechanism, type of ORL reconstruction, and pre/postoperative degree of extension lag were collected for the 27 cases identified. The cases were divided into lateral band (group A, n=15) and free tendon graft groups (group B, n=12). Group B was subdivided into the pull-in suture technique (B-I) and the Mitek bone anchor method (B-II).
Overall, ORL reconstructions had improved the mean DIP extension lag by 10° (P=0.027). Neither the reconstructive technique choice nor bone fixation method identified any statistically meaningful difference in functional outcome (P=0.51 and P=0.83, respectively). Soft-tissue injury was associated with 30.8° of improvement in the extension lag. The most common complications were tendon adhesion and rupture.
The choice of the ORL reconstructive technique or the bone anchor method did not influence the primary functional outcome of extension lag in this study. Both lateral band and free tendon graft ORL reconstructions are valid treatment methods in the management of chronic mallet deformity.
在锤状指畸形的治疗中,斜支持韧带(ORL)重建为近端指间关节主动伸展时远端指间关节(DIP)的自动伸展提供了一种机制。ORL重建的两种变体分别使用外侧束或游离肌腱移植。本研究旨在比较这两种手术技术,并评估功能结果的任何差异。作为次要措施,比较了Mitek骨锚和拉入缝线方法。
对ORL重建进行单机构回顾性研究。收集了27例患者的标准人口统计学资料、损伤机制、ORL重建类型以及术前/术后伸展滞后程度。病例分为外侧束组(A组,n = 15)和游离肌腱移植组(B组,n = 12)。B组再细分为拉入缝线技术组(B-I)和Mitek骨锚方法组(B-II)。
总体而言,ORL重建使平均DIP伸展滞后改善了10°(P = 0.027)。重建技术选择和骨固定方法在功能结果方面均未发现任何具有统计学意义的差异(分别为P = 0.51和P = 0.83)。软组织损伤使伸展滞后改善了30.8°。最常见的并发症是肌腱粘连和断裂。
在本研究中,ORL重建技术或骨锚方法的选择并未影响伸展滞后的主要功能结果。外侧束和游离肌腱移植的ORL重建都是治疗慢性锤状指畸形的有效方法。