Baidya Joydeep, Opara Olivia A, Pohl Nicholas B, Patrizio Harrison, Fras Sebastian, Glover Abbey, Beredjiklian Pedro K, Fletcher Daniel J
Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Hand (N Y). 2025 Jul 5:15589447251350167. doi: 10.1177/15589447251350167.
Patients with trigger finger who are refractory to nonsurgical treatments require trigger finger release (TFR) using A1 pulley release, while those with persistent triggering or severe proximal interphalangeal joint contracture may necessitate additional flexor tendon excision (FTE). This study characterizes the frequency of FTE performed at the time of primary TFR and compares outcomes between isolated TFR and TFR with additional FTE for trigger finger management.
A total of 8551 patients who underwent TFR were retrospectively reviewed, among whom 218 (2.5%) required additional FTE. A 2:1 matched isolated TFR group was used for comparison. Patient demographics, complications, and outcomes were compared.
A total of 121 patients undergoing TFR with FTE were matched to 243 patients undergoing isolated TFR. The TFR with complete FTE group was youngest and predominantly male. The long finger was most commonly affected across all groups. Wide Awake Local Anesthesia No Tourniquet was the most frequently used type of anesthesia in isolated TFR procedures. While local anesthesia with sedation was more commonly used for TFR with FTE. The proportion of patients who received at least one preoperative steroid injection was highest in the isolated TFR group. All other demographic variables, complications, and patient-reported outcomes were comparable between groups.
This study found high rates of postoperative improvement in TFR with FTE groups, as well as similar oral and steroid injections, complication rates, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores compared to the isolated TFR group. Therefore, TFR with FTE can be a safe and effective surgery with similar outcomes to isolated TFR and no additional risks in appropriately indicated patients.
扳机指患者若对非手术治疗无效,则需采用A1滑车松解术进行扳机指松解(TFR),而对于持续出现扳机现象或严重近端指间关节挛缩的患者,可能需要额外进行屈肌腱切除术(FTE)。本研究描述了初次TFR时进行FTE的频率,并比较了单纯TFR与联合FTE的TFR治疗扳机指的疗效。
回顾性分析了8551例行TFR的患者,其中218例(2.5%)需要额外进行FTE。采用1:2匹配的单纯TFR组作为对照。比较了患者的人口统计学特征、并发症及疗效。
121例行TFR联合FTE的患者与243例行单纯TFR的患者进行匹配。TFR联合完全FTE组患者最年轻,且以男性为主。所有组中,示指最常受累。清醒局麻无止血带技术是单纯TFR手术中最常用的麻醉方式。而TFR联合FTE手术更常采用局麻加镇静。单纯TFR组中接受至少一次术前类固醇注射的患者比例最高。两组间所有其他人口统计学变量、并发症及患者报告的疗效均具有可比性。
本研究发现,TFR联合FTE组术后改善率较高,与单纯TFR组相比,口服及类固醇注射、并发症发生率以及手臂、肩部和手部功能障碍评分相似。因此,对于合适的患者,TFR联合FTE手术可能是一种安全有效的手术,其疗效与单纯TFR相似,且无额外风险。