RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Surgical management of midcarpal instability (MCI), also referred to as carpal instability nondissociative, remains controversial due to limited evidence on different techniques. This study aimed to assess and compare differences in patient-reported pain, hand and wrist function, patient satisfaction, range of motion, and return to work in patients with non-traumatic MCI who underwent surgical treatment either through dorsal wrist capsulodesis or three-ligament tenodesis (3LT). METHODS: Patients with MCI and persisting complaints after conservative therapy treated with 3LT or dorsal capsulodesis were included. Patients with posttraumatic instability were excluded. Primary endpoints included the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) and Satisfaction with Treatment Result Questionnaire at 12 months postoperative. All data were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 91 patients treated with dorsal capsulodesis and 21 treated with 3LT between December 2011 and December 2019 were included. At twelve months postoperative, both treatment groups reported significant improvements in pain and function scores. However, at three months postoperative, the dorsal capsulodesis group exhibited significantly better outcomes, followed by a greater return to work (72%) compared to the 3LT group (50%). However, the capsulodesis group demonstrated a decreased range of motion at three months which was restored at 12 months postoperative. No significant difference in satisfaction with treatment was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Both 3LT and dorsal capsulodesis demonstrate promising results for addressing non-traumatic MCI. However, considering the quicker recovery and faster return to work associated with dorsal capsulodesis, we recommend favoring capsulodesis over 3LT when both surgical options are deemed suitable for the patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that the three-ligament tenodesis (3-LT) procedure is still sufficient - even in scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC) cases - to reduce pain and improve wrist function. We compared patient-reported outcomes of scapholunate interosseus ligament (SLIL) injury patients with SLAC to SLIL injury patients treated with 3-LT, and then to patients who received proximal row carpectomy (PRC), as a control group. METHOD: We included all patients with a traumatic SLIL injury and associated SLAC components treated with 3-LT and completed Patient Reported Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) questionnaires preoperative and at 12 months follow-up. First, we compared matched patients with SLIL injury and SLIL injury with SLAC, stage 1-3, who received 3-LT. Second, we compared patients who received 3-LT, with patients who underwent PRC, while having SLAC stage 2-3. RESULTS: We compared 51 patients with SLAC to 95 with SLIL injury who had a 3-LT procedure, and 10 3-LT patients were compared to 18 patients undergoing PRC, given SLAC 2-3. In both analyses, the PRWE scores had significantly improved in all groups, however no significant differences in PRWE were found between 3-LT in SLIL injury and SLIL injury with SLAC, 6.9 points (95% CI [-14.92; 1.22], p = 0.096) and between 3-LT and PRC, given SLAC stage 2-3, 15.1 points (not enough power). CONCLUSION: There is no difference in PRWE between matched SLIL injury patients with or without degenerative changes treated with a 3-LT. Therefore, the 3-LT procedure seems to be a viable treatment option for patients with early-stage SLAC wrist. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic III.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: Multiple studies report outcomes after 3-ligament tenodesis (3-LT) in treating traumatic scapholunate interosseous ligament injury (SLIL). However, investigators do not differentiate between patients with partial or complete SLIL injury. The relation between the extent of SLIL disruption and surgical outcomes and if this should be considered when treating a patient with SLIL injury remains unknown. We aimed to evaluate differences in patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) scores, satisfaction and return to work between patients with partial or complete chronic traumatic SLIL injury treated with 3 ligament tenodesis at 12 months after surgery. METHODS: All patients with chronic SLIL injury (partial and complete) who were treated with 3-LT at our clinic and received the same postoperative management between December 2011 and December 2019 were studied. Only patients who had completed the PRWE and return to work questionnaires preoperatively and 12 months after surgery were included. Patients were allocated to the partial (classified as Geissler 2 or 3) or complete SLIL injury group (classified as Geissler 4) by retrospectively assessing wrist arthroscopy reports. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients with partial and 90 with complete SLIL injuries were included. At 1-year follow-up, PRWE scores had significantly improved in both groups. When adjusting for clinical baseline characteristics, there was no statistically significant difference between patients with partial or complete SLIL injury. Patients with complete SLIL injury had a 70% higher return to work within the first 12 months after 3-LT; however, satisfaction with the treatment result was similar for both study groups 1 year after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with complete and partial traumatic SLIL injury report better PRWE total scores at 12 months after 3-LT, but there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in PRWE scores or satisfaction with the treatment result. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.
