延伸块钉钉与定制钢板固定技术:两种方法治疗骨性锤状指损伤的比较。

Burak Kuşcu, Kaan Gürbüz
{"title":"延伸块钉钉与定制钢板固定技术:两种方法治疗骨性锤状指损伤的比较。","authors":"Burak Kuşcu, Kaan Gürbüz","doi":"10.14744/tjtes.2024.15332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mallet finger injuries, characterized by a flexion deformity caused by trauma to the extensor mechanism at the base of the distal phalanx, can lead to significant functional impairment if not treated appropriately. Surgical interventions for osseous mallet finger injuries often include techniques such as extension-block pinning and perioperative modifying plate fixation. When comparing these two methods, it is critical to assess factors such as technical ease, perioperative considerations, and postoperative outcomes. This study aims to compare these two techniques to provide valuable insights into the optimal surgical approach for treating osseous mallet finger injuries, improving patient care and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2017 to 2022, a retrospective study of 89 patients with Doyle classification type IVB and IVC mallet finger injuries was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups using a surgical technique called block randomization. Group 1 included 46 patients treated with the extension-block pinning fixation technique, while Group 2 comprised 43 patients treated with the perioperative modifying plate fixation technique. Observations included nail deformities and dorsal prominence at the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients were deemed eligible for surgical intervention due to the time elapsed since injury or ineffectiveness of prior conservative treatment. No significant differences in patient demographics were observed between the two groups. While Crawford classification and pain scores showed no significant differences between the groups (p>0.05), the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Q-DASH) score and time to return to work significantly favored Group 2, which underwent perioperative modifying plate fixation (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Extension-block pinning is noted for its simplicity and favorable postoperative range of motion outcomes. In contrast, perioperative modifying plate fixation enhances stability and mechanical performance, positively impacting overall functional recovery. The choice between these techniques should consider procedural simplicity, perioperative demands, mechanical efficiency, and postoperative functional outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":94263,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES","volume":"31 1","pages":"84-94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Extension-block pinning versus custom-made plate fixation technique: A comparison of two methods in the treatment of osseous mallet finger injuries.\",\"authors\":\"Burak Kuşcu, Kaan Gürbüz\",\"doi\":\"10.14744/tjtes.2024.15332\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Mallet finger injuries, characterized by a flexion deformity caused by trauma to the extensor mechanism at the base of the distal phalanx, can lead to significant functional impairment if not treated appropriately. Surgical interventions for osseous mallet finger injuries often include techniques such as extension-block pinning and perioperative modifying plate fixation. When comparing these two methods, it is critical to assess factors such as technical ease, perioperative considerations, and postoperative outcomes. This study aims to compare these two techniques to provide valuable insights into the optimal surgical approach for treating osseous mallet finger injuries, improving patient care and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2017 to 2022, a retrospective study of 89 patients with Doyle classification type IVB and IVC mallet finger injuries was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups using a surgical technique called block randomization. Group 1 included 46 patients treated with the extension-block pinning fixation technique, while Group 2 comprised 43 patients treated with the perioperative modifying plate fixation technique. Observations included nail deformities and dorsal prominence at the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All patients were deemed eligible for surgical intervention due to the time elapsed since injury or ineffectiveness of prior conservative treatment. No significant differences in patient demographics were observed between the two groups. While Crawford classification and pain scores showed no significant differences between the groups (p>0.05), the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Q-DASH) score and time to return to work significantly favored Group 2, which underwent perioperative modifying plate fixation (p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Extension-block pinning is noted for its simplicity and favorable postoperative range of motion outcomes. In contrast, perioperative modifying plate fixation enhances stability and mechanical performance, positively impacting overall functional recovery. The choice between these techniques should consider procedural simplicity, perioperative demands, mechanical efficiency, and postoperative functional outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94263,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"84-94\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2024.15332\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2024.15332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:锤状指损伤,其特征是远端指骨基部伸肌机制外伤引起的屈曲畸形,如果治疗不当,可导致严重的功能损害。骨性锤状指损伤的手术干预通常包括伸展块钉钉和围手术期改良钢板固定等技术。在比较这两种方法时,评估诸如技术便利性、围手术期考虑和术后结果等因素至关重要。本研究旨在比较这两种技术,为治疗骨性锤状指损伤的最佳手术方法提供有价值的见解,改善患者的护理和预后。方法:对2017 ~ 2022年89例Doyle分型IVB型和IVC型槌状指损伤患者进行回顾性研究。使用一种称为块随机化的外科技术将患者分为两组。1组46例采用延伸块钉固定技术,2组43例采用围术期改良钢板固定技术。观察包括趾甲畸形和远端指间关节背突。结果:所有患者均因伤后时间过长或既往保守治疗无效而被认为符合手术干预条件。两组患者的人口统计学特征无显著差异。虽然克劳福德分类和疼痛评分在两组间无显著差异(p>0.05),但手臂、肩和手的快速残疾(Q-DASH)评分和恢复工作时间明显优于2组,该组接受围手术期改良钢板固定(p结论:伸展块钉钉术以其简单和良好的术后活动范围而着称。相反,围手术期改良钢板固定可提高稳定性和力学性能,对整体功能恢复有积极影响。在这些技术之间的选择应考虑手术的简单性、围手术期需求、机械效率和术后功能结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Extension-block pinning versus custom-made plate fixation technique: A comparison of two methods in the treatment of osseous mallet finger injuries.

Background: Mallet finger injuries, characterized by a flexion deformity caused by trauma to the extensor mechanism at the base of the distal phalanx, can lead to significant functional impairment if not treated appropriately. Surgical interventions for osseous mallet finger injuries often include techniques such as extension-block pinning and perioperative modifying plate fixation. When comparing these two methods, it is critical to assess factors such as technical ease, perioperative considerations, and postoperative outcomes. This study aims to compare these two techniques to provide valuable insights into the optimal surgical approach for treating osseous mallet finger injuries, improving patient care and outcomes.

Methods: From 2017 to 2022, a retrospective study of 89 patients with Doyle classification type IVB and IVC mallet finger injuries was conducted. The patients were divided into two groups using a surgical technique called block randomization. Group 1 included 46 patients treated with the extension-block pinning fixation technique, while Group 2 comprised 43 patients treated with the perioperative modifying plate fixation technique. Observations included nail deformities and dorsal prominence at the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint.

Results: All patients were deemed eligible for surgical intervention due to the time elapsed since injury or ineffectiveness of prior conservative treatment. No significant differences in patient demographics were observed between the two groups. While Crawford classification and pain scores showed no significant differences between the groups (p>0.05), the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Q-DASH) score and time to return to work significantly favored Group 2, which underwent perioperative modifying plate fixation (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Extension-block pinning is noted for its simplicity and favorable postoperative range of motion outcomes. In contrast, perioperative modifying plate fixation enhances stability and mechanical performance, positively impacting overall functional recovery. The choice between these techniques should consider procedural simplicity, perioperative demands, mechanical efficiency, and postoperative functional outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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