Return to Play After Thumb Ulnar Collateral Ligament Injuries Managed Surgically in Athletes-A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize the available data on how surgical management of injuries to the thumb ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) complex affects athletes and their return-to-play (RTP) and postinjury performance metrics in addition to evaluating rehabilitation guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed on PubMed and Embase databases for articles on outcomes of surgical treatment of thumb UCL injuries in athletes. Articles with expert recommendations on postoperative management and RTP guidelines were also included separately. Study characteristics were recorded, including sport, RTP rates, and data on performance. Recommendations were summarized by sport. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria was used to assess methodological quality. The authors also present their recommended return-to-sport algorithm.

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles were included, including 11 with reports on patients and 12 expert opinions on guiding RTP. The mean MINORS score for the applicable studies was 9.4. In the 311 patients included, RTP was 98.1% in aggregate. No performance detriments were noted in athletes after surgery. Thirty-two (10.3%) patients had postoperative complications. The recommendations on timing to RTP vary by sport and author, but all recommended initial thumb protection when returning to sport. Newer techniques, such as suture tape augmentation, suggest the permission for earlier motion.

CONCLUSIONS

Return-to-play rates after surgical treatment of thumb UCL injuries are high, with reassuring return to preinjury level of play with few complications. Recommendations for surgical technique have trended toward suture anchors and, now, suture tape augmentation with earlier motion protocols, although rehabilitation guidelines vary by sport and author. Current information on thumb UCL surgery in athletes is limited by the low quality of evidence and expert recommendations.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic IV.