Comparison of Fusion Rates/Complications Between Different Types of Thumb Metacarpophalangeal Fusion Techniques.

IF 1.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
HAND Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-22 DOI:10.1177/15589447241235343
Logan E Finger, Max C Hamaker, Anya Singh-Varma, Robert J Goitz, Robert A Kaufmann, John R Fowler
{"title":"Comparison of Fusion Rates/Complications Between Different Types of Thumb Metacarpophalangeal Fusion Techniques.","authors":"Logan E Finger, Max C Hamaker, Anya Singh-Varma, Robert J Goitz, Robert A Kaufmann, John R Fowler","doi":"10.1177/15589447241235343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Thumb metacarpophalangeal (MP) fusion is generally successful; however, complications have been reported to occur in 0% to 30% of cases, whereas nonunion rates vary by method but, overall, are reported to occur in 0% to 15% of cases. Many fixation techniques have been described, but there is no consensus on the optimal fusion technique. Our goal was to compare complication and union rates of different thumb MP arthrodesis techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent primary thumb MP fusion between 2000 and 2022. Patients who underwent revision fusion, fusion for infection, or amputation were excluded. Fusions of MP joints of other fingers were also excluded. Data collection consisted of demographic data, complications, time to fusion, rate of delayed union and rate of nonunion. Five different fusion constructs were evaluated during our study period: staples, Kirschner wires (K-wires), cerclage, K-wires with cerclage, and intramedullary screw.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-seven patients underwent fusion with staples, 16 with K-wires, 14 with cerclage, 9 with K-wires and cerclage, and 6 with an intramedullary screw. The individual complication and nonunion rates differed significantly among the groups with the intramedullary screw group having a statistically higher rate of nonunion (<i>P</i> = .004). Furthermore, smoking, diabetes, and being overweight were associated with nonunions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Union rates were significantly lower in patients treated with an intramedullary screw and those who are smokers, diabetics, and/or overweight. Caution should be exercised when using intramedullary screw fixation for MP fusion, especially in patients with these comorbidities.</p>","PeriodicalId":12902,"journal":{"name":"HAND","volume":" ","pages":"1022-1028"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571531/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HAND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15589447241235343","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Thumb metacarpophalangeal (MP) fusion is generally successful; however, complications have been reported to occur in 0% to 30% of cases, whereas nonunion rates vary by method but, overall, are reported to occur in 0% to 15% of cases. Many fixation techniques have been described, but there is no consensus on the optimal fusion technique. Our goal was to compare complication and union rates of different thumb MP arthrodesis techniques.

Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent primary thumb MP fusion between 2000 and 2022. Patients who underwent revision fusion, fusion for infection, or amputation were excluded. Fusions of MP joints of other fingers were also excluded. Data collection consisted of demographic data, complications, time to fusion, rate of delayed union and rate of nonunion. Five different fusion constructs were evaluated during our study period: staples, Kirschner wires (K-wires), cerclage, K-wires with cerclage, and intramedullary screw.

Results: Forty-seven patients underwent fusion with staples, 16 with K-wires, 14 with cerclage, 9 with K-wires and cerclage, and 6 with an intramedullary screw. The individual complication and nonunion rates differed significantly among the groups with the intramedullary screw group having a statistically higher rate of nonunion (P = .004). Furthermore, smoking, diabetes, and being overweight were associated with nonunions.

Conclusion: Union rates were significantly lower in patients treated with an intramedullary screw and those who are smokers, diabetics, and/or overweight. Caution should be exercised when using intramedullary screw fixation for MP fusion, especially in patients with these comorbidities.

不同类型拇指掌骨融合技术的融合率/并发症比较
背景:拇指掌指关节(MP)融合术一般都能取得成功;但有报道称,0% 到 30% 的病例会出现并发症,而非愈合率因方法而异,但总体而言,有报道称 0% 到 15% 的病例会出现非愈合。目前已有多种固定技术,但对于最佳的融合技术还没有达成共识。我们的目标是比较不同拇指骨髓关节融合技术的并发症和结合率:方法:我们对 2000 年至 2022 年间接受拇指 MP 原位融合术的患者进行了回顾性研究。方法:我们对 2000 年至 2022 年间接受过拇指主节融合术的患者进行了回顾性研究,排除了接受过翻修融合术、因感染接受融合术或截肢的患者。其他手指的MP关节融合也被排除在外。数据收集包括人口统计学数据、并发症、融合时间、延迟愈合率和未愈合率。在研究期间,我们对五种不同的融合结构进行了评估:订书钉、Kirschner钢丝(K-wires)、环扎、带环扎的K-wires和髓内螺钉:47名患者接受了订书机融合术,16名患者接受了K线融合术,14名患者接受了Cerclage融合术,9名患者接受了K线和Cerclage融合术,6名患者接受了髓内螺钉融合术。各组的并发症和不愈合率差异显著,髓内螺钉组的不愈合率更高,P = 0.004。此外,吸烟、糖尿病和超重也与不愈合有关:结论:使用髓内螺钉治疗的患者以及吸烟、糖尿病和/或超重的患者的骨结合率明显较低。在使用髓内螺钉固定进行骨盆融合术时应谨慎,尤其是患有这些合并症的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
HAND
HAND Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
209
期刊介绍: HAND is the official journal of the American Association for Hand Surgery and is a peer-reviewed journal featuring articles written by clinicians worldwide presenting current research and clinical work in the field of hand surgery. It features articles related to all aspects of hand and upper extremity surgery and the post operative care and rehabilitation of the hand.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信