Surgery, Needle Fasciotomy, or Collagenase Injection for Dupuytren Contracture : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgery, needle fasciotomy, and collagenase injection are used to treat Dupuytren contracture. The treatment decision requires balancing initial morbidity and costs of surgery against its potential long-term benefits over needle fasciotomy and collagenase. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of surgery, needle fasciotomy, and collagenase injection at 3 months and 2 years (secondary time points of the trial). DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized, outcome assessor-blinded, superiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03192020). SETTING: 6 public hospitals in Finland. PARTICIPANTS: 302 persons with treatment-naive Dupuytren contracture (contracture angle <135°). INTERVENTION: Surgery (n = 101), needle fasciotomy (n = 101), or collagenase (n = 100). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the success rate, defined as greater than 50% contracture release and patients reaching the patient acceptable symptom state. Secondary outcomes included hand function, pain, quality of life, patient satisfaction, residual contracture angle, finger flexion, risk for retreatment, and serious adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 292 (97%) and 284 (94%) participants completed the 3-month and 2-year follow-ups. Success rates were similar at 3 months: 71% (95% CI, 62% to 80%) for surgery, 73% (CI, 64% to 82%) for needle fasciotomy, and 73% (CI, 64% to 82%) for collagenase. At 2 years, surgery had superior success rates compared with both needle fasciotomy (78% vs. 50%; adjusted risk difference [aRD], 0.30 [CI, 0.17 to 0.43]) and collagenase (78% vs. 65%; aRD, 0.13 [CI, 0.01 to 0.26]). Secondary analyses paralleled with the primary analysis. LIMITATION: Participants were not blinded. CONCLUSION: Initial outcomes are similar between the treatments, but at 2 years success rates were maintained in the surgery group but were lower with both needle fasciotomy and collagenase despite retreatments. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Research Council of Finland.

Minimal invasions: is wrist arthroscopy supported by evidence? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Wrist arthroscopy is used increasingly, but its benefits and harms are unclear. This systematic review aimed to identify all published randomized controlled trials on wrist arthroscopy and synthesize the evidence of the benefits and harms of wrist arthroscopic procedures. METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomized controlled trials comparing wrist-arthroscopic surgery with corresponding open surgery, placebo surgery, a non-surgical treatment, or no treatment. We estimated the treatment effect with a random effect meta-analysis using patient reported outcome measure (PROM) as primary outcome where several studies assessed the same intervention. RESULTS: Of 7 included studies, none compared wrist arthroscopic procedures with no treatment or placebo surgery. 3 trials compared arthroscopically assisted reduction with fluoroscopic reduction of intra-articular distal radius fractures. The certainty of evidence was low to very low for all comparisons. The benefit of arthroscopy was clinically unimportant (smaller than what patients may consider meaningful) at all time points. 2 studies compared arthroscopic and open resection of wrist ganglia, finding no significant difference in recurrence rates. 1 study estimated the benefit of arthroscopic joint debridement and irrigation in intra-articular distal radius fractures, showing no clinically relevant benefit. 1 study compared arthroscopic triangular fibrocartilage complex repair with splinting in distal radioulnar joint instability in people with distal radius fractures, finding no evidence of benefits for repair at the long-term follow-up but the study was unblinded, and the estimates imprecise. CONCLUSION: The current limited evidence from RCTs does not support benefits of wrist arthroscopy compared with open or non-surgical interventions.

Apraxia testing to distinguish early Alzheimer's disease from psychiatric causes of cognitive impairment.

Objective: Mood- and stress-related disorders commonly cause attentional and memory impairments in middle-aged individuals. In memory testing, these impairments can be mistakenly interpreted as symptoms of dementia; thus, more reliable diagnostic approaches are needed. The present work defines the discriminant accuracy of the Dementia Apraxia Test (DATE) between psychiatric conditions and early-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) on its own and in combination with memory tests. Method: The consecutive sample included 50-70-year-old patients referred to dementia investigations for recent cognitive and/or affective symptoms. The DATE was administered and scored as a blinded measurement, and a receiver operating curve analysis was used to define the optimal diagnostic cut-off score. Results: A total of 24 patients were diagnosed with probable AD (mean age 61 ± 4) and 23 with a psychiatric condition (mean age 57 ± 4). The AD patients showed remarkable limb apraxia, but the psychiatric patients mainly performed at a healthy level on the DATE. The test showed a total discriminant accuracy of 87% for a total sum cut-off of 47 (sensitivity 79% and specificity 96%). The limb subscale alone reached an accuracy of 91% for a cut-off of 20 (sensitivity 83% and specificity 100%). All memory tests were diagnostically less accurate, while the combination of the limb praxis subscale and a verbal episodic memory test suggested a correct diagnosis in all but one patient. Conclusions: Apraxia testing may improve the accuracy of differentiation between AD and psychiatric aetiologies. Its potential in severe and chronic psychiatric conditions should be examined in the future.

The dementia apraxia test can detect early-onset Alzheimer's disease.

OBJECTIVE: Limb apraxia is a common early sign of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and is thought to occur specifically in early-onset (before the age of 65) AD. The Dementia Apraxia Test (DATE), a test of limb and face praxis developed to support the differential diagnosis of dementia, has shown good diagnostic accuracy in detecting AD in older patients, but it has not been validated for younger age groups. We investigated how accurately DATE can detect AD in middle-aged individuals and whether apraxia is a distinctive feature in early-onset AD. METHOD: A sample of mild-stage AD patients (n = 24; Mage = 61, SD = 4) was drawn from a prospective consecutive series of individuals referred to our neurology clinic for dementia investigations. A healthy comparison group (HC) of comparable age (n = 22; Mage = 61, SD = 7), sex distribution, and education was recruited. DATE was administered as a blinded experimental measure, and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to define the optimal diagnostic cutoff point. RESULTS: The DATE classified 93% of the participants correctly as AD or HC (sensitivity 0.88, specificity 1.00, area under curve 0.968). The optimal diagnostic cutoff point was higher (49 points) than in a previous sample of older patients (45 points). Early onset did not seem to be associated with worse praxis performance in AD. CONCLUSIONS: DATE is an accurate tool for detecting early-onset AD within 2 years of symptom onset. The diagnostic cutoff point should be higher for middle-aged populations than for late-onset AD. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).