Comparison of Thumb Metacarpophalangeal Arthrodesis to Volar Plate Capsulodesis for Metacarpophalangeal Hyperextension in the Setting of Basal Joint Arthritis-A Case-Control Study.

IF 2 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Jeffrey Alan Marchessault, Benjamin Roy Smith, Alexandra Jordan Johnson, William David Currie
{"title":"Comparison of Thumb Metacarpophalangeal Arthrodesis to Volar Plate Capsulodesis for Metacarpophalangeal Hyperextension in the Setting of Basal Joint Arthritis-A Case-Control Study.","authors":"Jeffrey Alan Marchessault, Benjamin Roy Smith, Alexandra Jordan Johnson, William David Currie","doi":"10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-25-00032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Surgical treatment of metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint hyperextension in the treatment of thumb basal joint arthritis can be categorized as motion preserving and arthrodesis. We compared minimum 2-year results between nonsurgical thumbs and thumbs undergoing ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition (LRTI) alone, thumb MCP arthrodesis, and volar plate capsulodesis as adjunct procedures to LRTI.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Single surgeon patients with thumb MCP hyperextension >30° underwent arthrodesis or volar plate capsulodesis with LRTI. Thirty-one LRTI thumbs were compared with 22 LRTI with arthrodesis (LRTI + A), 21 LRTI with MCP capsulodesis (LRTI + C), and 65 nonsurgical controls. Patient-reported outcome measures were recorded with grip strength, tip pinch, lateral pinch, opposition, and pre-/postoperative hyperextension measured by one of the authors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No difference was found in Michigan Hand Questionnaire scores (P = 0.13), QuickDASH values (P = 0.38), or visual analog scale results (P = 0.86). No difference was observed in grip strength (P = 0.97) or tip pinch (P = 0.66). Lateral pinch was decreased between LRTI and nonsurgical thumbs but not when compared with groups with adjunct MCP procedures (P = 0.0064). LRTI + A had the least opposition (P < 0.001). In the LRTI + C group, MCP hyperextension worsened in two patients (9%) and 14 of 22 (63%) had postoperative values equal or greater than 30°.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusion: </strong>Our LRTI + C cohort experienced persistent MCP hyperextension, with mean postoperative hyperextension of >30°. Despite the literature suggesting that this portends inferior outcomes, our LRTI + C cohort demonstrated near-equal outcomes when compared with the LRTI, LRTI + A, and control groups. We no longer perform capsulodesis for MCP hyperextension and offer arthrodesis for MCP arthrosis or hyperextension not actively correctable by the patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":45062,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews","volume":"9 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11939946/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Global Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-25-00032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Surgical treatment of metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint hyperextension in the treatment of thumb basal joint arthritis can be categorized as motion preserving and arthrodesis. We compared minimum 2-year results between nonsurgical thumbs and thumbs undergoing ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition (LRTI) alone, thumb MCP arthrodesis, and volar plate capsulodesis as adjunct procedures to LRTI.

Methods: Single surgeon patients with thumb MCP hyperextension >30° underwent arthrodesis or volar plate capsulodesis with LRTI. Thirty-one LRTI thumbs were compared with 22 LRTI with arthrodesis (LRTI + A), 21 LRTI with MCP capsulodesis (LRTI + C), and 65 nonsurgical controls. Patient-reported outcome measures were recorded with grip strength, tip pinch, lateral pinch, opposition, and pre-/postoperative hyperextension measured by one of the authors.

Results: No difference was found in Michigan Hand Questionnaire scores (P = 0.13), QuickDASH values (P = 0.38), or visual analog scale results (P = 0.86). No difference was observed in grip strength (P = 0.97) or tip pinch (P = 0.66). Lateral pinch was decreased between LRTI and nonsurgical thumbs but not when compared with groups with adjunct MCP procedures (P = 0.0064). LRTI + A had the least opposition (P < 0.001). In the LRTI + C group, MCP hyperextension worsened in two patients (9%) and 14 of 22 (63%) had postoperative values equal or greater than 30°.

Discussion and conclusion: Our LRTI + C cohort experienced persistent MCP hyperextension, with mean postoperative hyperextension of >30°. Despite the literature suggesting that this portends inferior outcomes, our LRTI + C cohort demonstrated near-equal outcomes when compared with the LRTI, LRTI + A, and control groups. We no longer perform capsulodesis for MCP hyperextension and offer arthrodesis for MCP arthrosis or hyperextension not actively correctable by the patient.

在基底关节炎的情况下,比较拇指掌指关节固定术和外侧骨板囊锁术治疗掌指关节过伸--一项病例对照研究。
导论:拇指基底关节关节炎中掌指关节过伸的手术治疗可分为运动保持和关节融合术。我们比较了非手术拇指和单纯接受韧带重建联合肌腱介入(LRTI)、拇指MCP关节融合术和掌侧钢板包膜固定术作为LRTI辅助手术的拇指至少2年的结果。方法:单手术治疗拇MCP过伸bbb30°患者行关节融合术或掌侧钢板包膜固定术。31只LRTI拇指与22只关节融合术(LRTI + A)、21只MCP包膜融合术(LRTI + C)和65只非手术对照进行比较。记录由作者之一测量的握力、指尖捏、侧捏、对位和术前/术后过伸。结果:密歇根手量表得分(P = 0.13)、QuickDASH值(P = 0.38)和视觉模拟量表结果(P = 0.86)均无差异。握力(P = 0.97)和尖捏(P = 0.66)无差异。LRTI组和非手术组的侧捏减少,但与辅助MCP组相比没有减少(P = 0.0064)。LRTI + A的反对意见最少(P < 0.001)。在LRTI + C组中,2例患者(9%)的MCP过伸加重,22例患者中有14例(63%)的术后值等于或大于30°。讨论和结论:我们的LRTI + C队列经历了持续的MCP过伸,术后平均过伸bbb30°。尽管文献表明这预示着较差的结果,但与LRTI、LRTI + A和对照组相比,我们的LRTI + C队列显示出接近相等的结果。我们不再对MCP过伸进行包膜固定术,而对患者无法主动矫正的MCP关节或过伸进行关节固定术。
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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
282
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信