[Rhizarthrosis: Resection Arthroplasty versus Resection Suspension Arthroplasty - Still the Gold Standard?]

Abstract

Rhizarthrosis is one of the most common arthritic changes in the hand, which has led to the development of a large number of surgical methods in recent years. In addition to the traditional resection arthroplasty with tendon suspension or interposition, if needed, thumb saddle joint prostheses are being used more and more frequently. However, these are not an option for all patients such as those with severe osteoporosis, severe nickel allergy, insufficient height of the trapezium or STT osteoarthritis. This study examined whether the traditional surgical methods continue to have their "right to exist" or whether they will be replaced by prostheses. In a retrospective study with prospective data collection, 48 hands of 45 patients diagnosed with rhizarthrosis in stages II and III according to Eaton and Littler were clinically examined 2.5 years after resection arthroplasty/resection-suspension-interposition arthroplasty using flexor carpi radialis (FCR) or abductor pollicis longus (APL) tendon strips in the years 2015-2018. The postoperative outcome was assessed using mobility, grip strength, two-point discrimination, postoperative satisfaction with regard to pain and resilience, as well as the DASH and MHQ questionnaires. There were no significant differences in surgery duration, inability to work, time to full weight-bearing, pain, satisfaction, grip strength and mobility. Regardless of the surgical method used, patients achieved an almost free range of motion in the thumb and wrist as well as age-appropriate hand strength. Pain at rest was rare; 48% were pain-free during exercise. The DASH questionnaire scored 20.2, 13.9 and 22.1 points and the MHQ scored 76.3, 79.3 and 79.4 points. Hence, the traditional surgical techniques showed good postoperative results with high patient satisfaction. "Newer procedures" such as endoprosthesis offer promising results in terms of faster regeneration times. However, this is offset by a longer surgery time and higher material costs, which means that resection arthroplasty represents a long-established procedure with a low potential for complications and a lower revision rate and should continue to be used, especially if there are relative contraindications to an endoprosthesis.