Primary Negative Prognostic Factors in Pediatric and Adult Patients Undergoing Trigger Finger Surgery.

Objectives This study aims to investigate the negative prognostic indicators of pediatric and adult trigger finger surgery patients concerning complications, recurrence, and satisfaction. Methods A retrospective study was conducted on 61 patients with a total of 91 trigger fingers, including 31 in children and 30 in adult patients, all of whom were treated using a standardized surgical technique. The study considered several demographic and clinical factors, including age, gender, dominant hand, body mass index, occupation, history of trauma, single or multiple finger involvement, staging according to Green classification, diabetes mellitus, comorbidities, recurrence, revision surgery, utilization of non-surgical treatment methods, need for rehabilitation after surgery, time to return to work, the time interval from clinic initiation to the surgery, satisfaction and the duration of the follow-up period. In addition, the quick version of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (QDASH); and the visual analog scale (VAS) were used to assess patients' data. Results In adult patients, a statistically significant relationship was observed between the increasing grade of the Green stage and complication rate (p<0.001), recurrence (p<0.001), and lower satisfaction (p<0.001). No statistically significant relationship was identified between Green's classification and complications (p=0.129), recurrence (p=0.854), or satisfaction (p=0.143) in pediatric patients. While a statistically significant relationship existed between the time interval from clinic initiation to surgery and complications (p=0.033) in adult patients, no significant relationships were observed for recurrence or satisfaction. Conversely, there was no statistically significant relationship between the time interval from clinic initiation to surgery and complications, recurrence, or satisfaction in pediatric patients. Conclusion This study demonstrates that increasing the grade of the Green stage and duration of symptoms before surgery were the substantial factors contributing to prognosis in adult patients but not in pediatric patients. These findings can assist physicians during patients' treatment management. We suggest that physicians consider these factors for patients' satisfaction.

Serious Complications of the Percutaneous A1 Pulley Release: Case Reports and Literature Review.

Percutaneous first annular pulley (A1 pulley) release, which has been increasingly used to treat trigger fingers, has been widely established as a safe and simple procedure. Multiple studies have reported positive results of percutaneous A1 pulley release. In this study, however, we report cases of patients who developed complications after undergoing percutaneous A1 pulley release at local clinics. A total of six patients visited our hospital for infectious complications after percutaneous A1 pulley release. Various sequelae such as damage to normal structures, insufficient procedure, and tissue necrosis were observed during the exploration. A retrospective study was conducted to identify the cause and trend of the observed complications by instruments (HAKI knife or needle). In the HAKI knife group, there was a tendency for damage to normal structures, while in the needle group, an insufficient release or serious soft tissue necrosis was observed. Based on these cases, our findings confirm the existence and characteristics of infectious complications following the percutaneous A1 pulley release. We further identify that the type of instrument used predicts the nature of complications. Thus, reliable and skilled performance of the procedure by experts is essential for safe treatment.

A Review of 1228 In-Office Hand Surgery Procedures With Wide Awake Local Anesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) at a Single Private Practice.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the complication rate of Wide Awake Local Anesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) technique in the clinic setting with field sterility at a single private practice. We hypothesized that WALANT is safe and effective with a low complication rate. METHODS: This retrospective chart review included 1228 patients who underwent in-office WALANT hand procedures at a single private practice between 2015 and 2022. Patients were divided into groups based on type of procedure: carpal tunnel release, A1 pulley release, first dorsal compartment release, extensor tendon repair, mass excision, foreign body removal, and needle aponeurotomy. Patient demographics and complications were recorded; statistical comparisons of cohort demographics and risk factors for complications were completed, and P < .05 was considered significant for all statistical comparisons. RESULTS: The overall complication rate for all procedures was 2.77% for 1228 patients including A1 pulley release (n = 962, 2.7%), mass excision (n = 137, 3.7%), extensor tendon repair (n = 23, 4.3%), and first dorsal compartment release (n = 22, 8.3%). Carpal tunnel release, foreign body removal, and needle aponeurotomy groups experienced no complications. No adverse events (e.g. vasovagal reactions, digital ischemia, local anesthetic toxicity, inadequate vasoconstriction) were observed in any group. Patients with known autoimmune disorders and those who were currently smoking had a statistically significant higher complication rate. CONCLUSIONS: Office-based WALANT procedures with field sterility are safe and effective for treating common hand maladies and have a similar complication profile when compared to historical controls from the standard operating room in an ambulatory center or hospital.

Incision techniques for trigger thumb release: a comparison of outcomes of four types of skin incision.

Although trigger thumb release is commonly performed, there is no consensus on the optimal skin incision. This study aimed to compare outcomes of four incision techniques, including V-shaped, oblique, transverse and longitudinal incisions. Outcomes included the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire, satisfaction with the treatment and postoperative complications. The results of 875 patients who underwent trigger thumb release were assessed. All groups demonstrated improvement in self-reported hand function (range of 10-14 points), pain (25-27 points) and aesthetics (4-7 points) from baseline to 3 months postoperatively with no differences between incision techniques. Of the patients, 76% reported good or excellent satisfaction with the outcome of treatment. Satisfaction and complication rates of the different incision techniques were similar. These findings imply that there is no clear benefit of one type of incision over another for trigger thumb release, suggesting that surgeons may use the technique of their preference.Level of evidence: III.

Surgical Treatment for Trigger Thumb Using a Radial Approach.

The anatomy of the thumb flexor pulley system and surrounding structures differs from the fingers. The hand's positioning during trigger thumb release is troublesome. Iatrogenic radial digital nerve injuries of the thumb following opened or percutaneous A1 pulley release have been reported. We present the radial approach using a transverse incision for surgical release of the trigger thumb. This surgical approach aimed to restore a familiar surgical hand position, prevent radial digital nerve injury and bowstringing of the flexor pollicis longus, and decrease postoperative pain to facilitate recovery of hand function.

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Absorbable and Nonabsorbable Sutures in A1 Pulley Release.

BACKGROUND: Both absorbable and nonabsorbable sutures are used to correct palmar incisions or lacerations. Nonabsorbable sutures have been used without complications but require removal at a follow-up appointment. Alternatively, the use of absorbable sutures has increased in popularity as postoperative suture removal is not required but is associated with local immunological and inflammatory responses. In this study, we compared the scar quality and outcomes of nonabsorbable and absorbable sutures in A1 pulley release. METHODS: Patients who underwent A1 pulley release were randomized to 1 of 2 suture materials. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale, Observer Scar Assessment Scale, Visual Analogue Scale, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were collected at 2, 6, and 12 weeks postoperatively. Among the 41 patients included in the study, 23 were randomized to the nonabsorbable suture group, and 18 to the absorbable suture group. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two suture groups in the aforementioned assessments. Complication rates were higher in the nonabsorbable suture group, but the difference was not statistically significant. Notably, 1 case in the absorbable suture group had uncontrolled postoperative bleeding and required reoperation. CONCLUSION: We found no significant difference between the two materials in terms of the Patient or Observer Scar Assessment Scales, overall complication rates, symptom scores, or pain scores. Therefore, the choice using absorbable or nonabsorbable can be guided by other factors such as physician or patient preference, availability, and cost.

Dorsal proximal interphalangeal joint tenderness is associated with prolonged postoperative pain after A1 pulley release for trigger fingers.

BACKGROUND: In some trigger finger patients, tenderness is found in the dorsal proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint. The etiology and prevalence of this condition are unclear. Furthermore, surgical outcomes for trigger fingers with coexisting dorsal PIP tenderness have not been reported. This study (1) determined the prevalence and risk factors for PIP joint tenderness in trigger fingers and (2) compared postoperative outcomes for trigger fingers with and without joint tenderness. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted between August 2018 and March 2020. We enrolled 190 patients diagnosed with single-digit trigger fingers undergoing open A1 pulley release. The incidence, demographic data, and surgical outcomes of patients with dorsal PIP tenderness were investigated. Factors associated with tenderness were analyzed, including patient occupation, finger involvement, trigger finger grading, duration of symptoms, previous corticosteroid injections, and presence of diabetes mellitus. A numeric pain scale, a patient-specific functional scale, and the range of motion were evaluated preoperatively and 1, 2, and 6 weeks after surgery, with telephone follow-ups at 3 and 6 months. RESULTS: Of 190 patients, 46.8% had tenderness of the dorsal PIP joint. Patients with joint tenderness had significantly more overall postoperative pain for up to 6 weeks and reported residual minor pain for up to 3 months. The functional scale and range of motion of the 2 groups did not differ during follow-up. The only risk factor observed was the occupation of the patients. CONCLUSION: Dorsal PIP tenderness is more common in trigger fingers than previously thought. It is also associated with higher and prolonged levels of postoperative pain after A1 pulley release. Therefore, patients with pre-existing PIP tenderness should be informed about the possibility of sustaining residual minor pain for up to 3 months after surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Responsiveness of PROMIS Instruments for Trigger Digit After Corticosteroid Injection or A1 Pulley Release.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to determine if the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) is sufficiently sensitive to detect improvement after 2 common treatments of trigger finger: corticosteroid injection or A1 pulley release. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 72 patients in the injection group and 51 in the A1 pulley release group. PROMIS physical function (PF), pain interference (PI), and upper extremity (UE) scores were collected at baseline and 6 weeks after injection for the injection group and at baseline, and 1 week, 6 weeks, and 3 months after surgery for A1 pulley release patients. Descriptive statistics and paired t tests were used to compare PROMIS scores within each cohort. Standardized response means (SRMs) were calculated for each PROMIS domain to gauge instrument responsiveness. RESULTS: Average age was 62 years, 65% were female patients, and 86% were White for the steroid injection cohort, compared to 60 years, 71%, and 88%, respectively, for the A1 pulley release cohort. For the steroid injection group, mean PROMIS PI scores (-4.0 points; SRM = -0.6) and PROMIS UE scores (+3.3 points; SRM = 0.5) improved significantly at 6 weeks after injection compared to baseline. Meanwhile, A1 pulley release patients improved significantly in mean PI scores (-3.7 points; SRM = -0.5) and in UE scores (+4.9 points; SRM = 0.7) at 3 months after surgery compared to baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical improvements after trigger digit treatments are reflected in improved PROMIS PI and UE scores that reach previously accepted minimum clinically important difference values for hand patients. PROMIS PI and UE also are more responsive than PROMIS PF in capturing improvement for trigger digit treatments. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As health care payers continue to emphasize patient-reported outcomes to determine treatment value and set reimbursement rates, this study helps establish that clinical improvement after trigger digit treatments are reflected in PROMIS PI and UE domains by reaching previously established minimum clinically important difference values for hand patients.

Isolated A1 pulley release surgery for trigger finger leads to significant increase in tip-to-tip pinch strength.

BACKGROUND: Even in the first application of patients with early complaints of trigger finger, pinch strength of the hand may be affected. Therefore, it is difficult to assess the change of strength as a result of treatment in this problem. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the change of strength taking into account both measured and expected pinch strengths before and after A1 pulley release surgery. METHODS: Thirty fingers (9 thumbs, 12 middle, 8 ring and 1 index fingers) of 26 patients (17 women, 9 men) who underwent A1 pulley release were included into this study. The mean age of the patients was 53 (16-71). Tip-to-tip finger pinch strengths were measured pre-operatively and at 3 months postoperatively. The expected strengths were calculated using the values obtained from the healthy side and taking into account the dominance effect. In the analysis, pre-operative and postoperative measured strength/expected strength ratios were compared. RESULTS: The mean of measured pinch strength/expected pinch strength ratio was 0.91 ± 0.3 pre-operatively and 1.14 ± 0.3 postoperatively (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: With the calculation method used in this study, it was found that there was a significant increase in the tip-to-tip pinch strength after surgical A1 pulley release for the trigger finger. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III (Retrospective cohort study).

Comparative Study of A1 Pulley Release and Ulnar Superficialis Slip Resection in Trigger Finger With Flexion Contracture of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of A1 pulley release with ulnar superficialis slip resection (group A) and simple A1 pulley release (group B) in trigger finger with flexion contracture of the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint. METHODS: From January 2016 to December 2019, the 2 surgical procedures were performed alternately every year for trigger fingers with preoperative PIP joint flexion contractures of ≥10°. Twenty-six fingers in group A and 29 fingers in group B that were followed up for >1 year were reviewed in this retrospective study. The visual analog scale (VAS) score; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score; degree of PIP joint flexion contracture; grip strength; and pinch strength were measured after surgery and compared. RESULTS: The differences in postoperative PIP joint flexion contracture between groups were <4° at 2 and 6 weeks, and there were no clinically relevant differences at 6 weeks and 12 months. At the final follow-up, PIP joint flexion contractures of 5° were observed in 2 fingers in each group. The difference in VAS scores between groups was less than half of a point until 3 months, and there were no clinically relevant differences at 6 weeks and 12 months. The DASH score did not show any difference between groups at the final follow-up. There were clinically relevant differences in the grip and pinch strengths between groups at 6 weeks. However, there were no clinically relevant differences at the final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Proximal interphalangeal joint flexion contracture measurements and clinical scores did not differ between groups at the final follow-up. Therefore, we recommend use of a simple A1 pulley release, which is simpler than an A1 pulley release with ulnar superficialis slip resection, in cases of trigger finger with PIP joint flexion contracture. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

A Comparison of Blinded versus Ultrasound-Guided Limited-Open Trigger Finger Release Using the Yasunaga Knife.

Background: An open approach is the gold standard for trigger finger (TF) release. However, this may be associated with infection and scar tenderness. Percutaneous trigger release is an alternative, but this can sometimes result in incomplete release and digital nerve injury, even with ultrasound (US) guidance. Limited-open TF release is an intermediate technique that uses a specially designed knife via a 2-3 mm incision. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of blinded versus US-guided limited-open TF release using the Yasunaga knife (Medical U&A, Inc., Japan). Methods: About 138 fingers in 111 patients underwent limited-open TF release using the Yasunaga knife. Green classification was used to grade the severity of TF. Thirty-one patients had grade 3 TF and 80 patients had grade 4 TF. The TF was released in a blinded fashion in 60 patients and using US guidance in 51 patients. Outcome measures included residual triggering, contracture of the proximal interphalangeal joint, visual analog scale (VAS) for assessment of pain, Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, and the Patel and Moradia grading of patient satisfaction. Complications were also recorded. Results: Six patients had residual triggering in the blinded group, whereas it resolved in all patients in the US-guided group. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.03). Patients in both groups showed significant improvement in VAS and Quick DASH score postoperatively. There were no significant differences between the two groups for these two outcomes. Patient satisfaction was graded as excellent by 20 patients and good by 30 patients in the US-guided group compared to eight excellent and 45 good in the blinded group. Conclusion: The incidence of residual triggering was lower and overall satisfaction higher in patients who underwent US-guided limited-open TF release using the Yasunaga knife. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).

Percutaneous A1 Pulley Release Combined with Finger Splint for Trigger Finger with Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Flexion Contracture.

Background: Long-standing trigger finger can lead to proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint flexion contracture. In the present study, we present the clinical outcome of percutaneous release with finger splinting for trigger finger with PIP joint flexion contracture prospectively. Methods: We compared outcomes in patients with trigger fingers combined with proximal interphalangeal joint flexion contracture treated by percutaneous release therapy regimen alone (group I) or percutaneous trigger finger release combined with finger splint (group II) during January 2011 and May 2016 with 6 months follow up. Results: Sixty-five patients were randomly allocated to group I (35 patients) or group II (30 patients). Symptoms of locking sensation and pain over the A1 pulley were improved in all patients. The patients in group II showed significantly greater improvements in the flexion contracture angles of proximal interphalangeal joint at post-operative 3 months later (group I, 9.4° ± 4.1°; group II, 27.8° ± 4.6°) and at 6 months later (group I, 15.1° ± 5.2°; group II, 35.7° ± 5.3°) relative to group I. In group II, 25 fingers achieved near full extension (< 10° contracture) after 6 months. Conclusions: Percutaneous release combined with finger splint is regarded as a useful therapy to speed recovery of trigger finger with proximal interphalangeal joint flexion contracture.

A prospective, randomized clinical trial of transverse versus longitudinal incisions for trigger finger release.

We investigated whether incision type affects scar quality or outcome following trigger finger release. Our primary and secondary hypotheses were that transverse and longitudinal incision types yield similar scar quality and functional improvement. Digits undergoing trigger finger release at the participating hospitals were randomized to receive transverse or longitudinal incisions. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale, Observer Scar Assessment Scale, and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score were collected at 8 and 54 weeks postoperatively. Of 86 randomized patients, 67 patients (71%) had followed-up at 54 weeks postoperatively. We found no significant differences in above three assessments between the incisions at either time-point. Among patients receiving both incision types for multiple simultaneous trigger finger release, there were no significant differences in Patient Scar Assessment Scale or Observer Scar Assessment Scale scores. We found no significant difference in the scar quality and improvement in patient-reported disability with transverse or longitudinal incisions for trigger finger release. Level of evidence: II.

Factors Causing Prolonged Postoperative Symptoms Despite Absence of Complications After A1 Pulley Release for Trigger Finger.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the incidence and prognostic factors for prolonged postoperative symptoms after open A1 pulley release in patients with trigger finger, despite absence of any complications. METHODS: We reviewed 109 patients (78 single-finger involvement, 31 multiple-finger involvement) who underwent open A1 pulley release for trigger finger from 2010 to 2016, with 8 weeks or longer postsurgical follow-up and without postoperative complications. The group had 16 men and 93 women, with mean age of 56 years (range, 21-81 years), and average follow-up period of 24.8 weeks (range, 8.0-127.4 weeks). Prolonged postoperative symptoms were defined as symptoms persisting for longer than 8 weeks after surgery. Factors analyzed for delay in recovery included duration of preoperative symptoms; number of preoperative local corticosteroid injections; preoperative flexion contracture of proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint; multiplicity of trigger finger lesions; occupation; presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus, other hand disorders like carpal tunnel syndrome, de Quervain disease, or Dupuytren contracture; and fraying or partial tear of the flexor tendon. RESULTS: Twenty-six fingers (19.3%) showed prolonged postoperative symptoms, with mean time until complete relief being 14.0 ± 6.4 weeks (range, 9-34 weeks). Risk factors associated with prolonged postoperative symptoms included duration of preoperative symptoms, preoperative flexion contracture of the PIP joint, and fraying or partial tear of the flexor tendon. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should consider the duration of preoperative symptoms and preoperative flexion contracture of the PIP joint when deciding timing of surgery for trigger finger patients. In addition, they should explain to patients with a positive history of these factors and in whom flexor tendon injury is found during surgery about the possibility of prolonged postoperative symptoms. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic IV.

Comparative study of ultrasonography-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release versus blinded percutaneous A1 pulley release.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the results of blind versus ultrasonography-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release for treatment of trigger finger. METHODS: This prospective study included 21 patients (25 fingers) who underwent blind release and 20 patients (23 fingers) who underwent ultrasonography-guided release. The visual analog scale (VAS) score, proximal interphalangeal joint contracture, complications, and patient satisfaction were compared between the groups. RESULTS: At the final follow-up, triggering had disappeared in all patients who underwent ultrasonography-guided release, whereas three patients who underwent blind release required revision surgery for postoperative triggering. No complications were observed. VAS score was significantly different between groups at 2 and 4 weeks postoperatively. All patients who underwent ultrasonography-guided release were satisfied, whereas three patients who underwent blind release were not satisfied. CONCLUSION: Ultrasonography-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release for treatment of trigger finger reduces postoperative pain and complications, such as incomplete release, compared with a blind procedure.

Functional outcome of open surgical A1 pulley release in diabetic and nondiabetic patients.

PURPOSE: Trigger finger, also referred to as stenotic flexor tenosynovitis, is a common condition affecting the digits, with a lifetime incidence of 2.6% among the healthy population and up to 16.5% in diabetic patients. Diabetes mellitus is associated with multiple musculoskeletal conditions including trigger finger. In this study, we aimed to compare the functional outcome of trigger finger release in diabetic and nondiabetic patients to evaluate whether the management of trigger finger in diabetic patients should be the same as that in nondiabetic patients, or whether diabetic patients would benefit from a more tailored management plan to optimize results. METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was performed at a single center among patients who underwent A1 pulley release from January 2013 to February 2017. Patients were diagnosed with trigger finger grades I to IV according to the Quinnell classification and assessed using the The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire (Arabic version). RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients, including 21 male (30.4%) and 48 female (69.6%), underwent A1 pulley release surgery. More than half of the participants included in this study were diabetic (n = 40, 58%) and 29 were nondiabetic (42%). The mean postoperative QuickDASH scores were 19.93 among diabetic patients and 17.15 among nondiabetic patients. There was no significant difference in the functional outcome between diabetic and nondiabetic ( p = 0.6) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The postoperative functional outcomes are similar in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Therefore, the management of trigger finger should be the same in both groups.

Cost of Immediate Surgery Versus Non-operative Treatment for Trigger Finger in Diabetic Patients.

PURPOSE: As health care costs continue to rise, providers must increasingly identify and implement cost-effective practice measures without sacrificing quality of care. Corticosteroid injections are an established treatment for trigger finger; however, numerous clinical trials have documented the limited efficacy of these injections in the diabetic population. Furthermore, the most cost-effective treatment strategy for diabetic trigger finger has not been determined. The purpose of this study was to perform a decision analysis to identify the least costly strategy for effective treatment of diabetic trigger finger using existing evidence in the literature. METHODS: Four treatment strategies for diabetic trigger finger were identified: (1) 1 steroid injection followed by surgical release, (2) 2 steroid injections followed by surgical release, (3) immediate surgical release in the operating room, and (4) immediate surgical release in the clinic. A literature review was conducted to determine success rates of the different treatment strategies. Costing analysis was performed using our institutional reimbursement from Medicare. One-way sensitivity and threshold analysis was utilized to determine the least costly treatment strategy. RESULTS: The least costly treatment strategy was immediate surgical release in the clinic. In patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, this strategy results in a 32% and a 39% cost reduction when compared with treatment with 1 or 2 corticosteroid injections, respectively. For 1 or 2 corticosteroid injections to be the most cost-effective strategy, injection failure rates would need to be less than 36% and 34%, respectively. The overall cost of care for immediate surgical release in the clinic was $642. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic trigger finger is a common problem faced by hand surgeons, with a variety of acceptable treatment algorithms. Management of diabetic trigger finger with immediate surgical release in the clinic is the most cost-effective treatment strategy, assuming a corticosteroid injection failure rate of at least 34%. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic/decision III.

Evaluation of Percutaneous First Annular Pulley Release: Efficacy and Complications in a Perfused Cadaveric Study.

PURPOSE: Trigger finger is the most common entrapment tendinopathy, with a lifetime risk of 2% to 3%. Open surgical release of the flexor tendon sheath is a commonly performed procedure associated with a high rate of success. Despite reported success rates of over 94%, percutaneous trigger finger release (PFTR) remains a controversial procedure because of the risk of iatrogenic digital neurovascular injury. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of traditional percutaneous and ultrasound (US)-guided first annular (A1) pulley releases performed on a perfused cadaveric model. METHODS: First annular pulley releases were performed percutaneously using an 18-gauge needle in 155 digits (124 fingers and 31 thumbs) of un-embalmed cadavers with restored perfusion. A total of 45 digits were completed with US guidance and 110 digits were completed without it. Each digit was dissected and assessed regarding the amount of release as well as neurovascular, flexor tendon, and A2 pulley injury. RESULTS: Overall, 114 A1 pulleys were completely released (74%). There were 38 partial releases (24%) and 3 complete misses (2%). No significant flexor tendon injury was seen. Longitudinal scoring of the flexor tendon was found in 35 fingers (23%). There were no lacerations to digital nerves and one ulnar digital artery was partially lacerated (1%) in a middle finger with a partial flexion contracture that prevented appropriate hyperextension. The ultrasound-assisted and blind PTFR techniques had similar complete pulley release and injury rates. CONCLUSIONS: Both traditional and US-assisted percutaneous release of the A1 pulley can be performed for all fingers. Perfusion of cadaver digits enhances surgical simulation and evaluation of PTFR beyond those of previous cadaveric studies. The addition of vascular flow to the digits during percutaneous release allows for Doppler flow assessment of the neurovascular bundle and evaluation of vascular injury. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our cadaveric data align with those of published clinical investigations for percutaneous A1 pulley release.

Comparison of three different incision techniques in A1 pulley release on scar tissue formation and postoperative rehabilitation.

INTRODUCTION: The optimal surgical approach for trigger finger release remains controversial in hindsight of postoperative rehabilitation as well as scar tissue formation. In this study, we comparatively evaluated the outcome of three different types of skin incision by employing the "Disability of the Arm Shoulder and Hand Score" (DASH) and by quantitative ultrasound measurements of scar tissue volume. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients (32 triggerfingers) were enrolled in this study and randomly assigned to one of three groups: incision placed (1) transversal in distal palmar crease, (2) transversal and 2 mm distal from distal palmar crease, (3) longitudinally over MCP joint without crossing the distal palmar crease. Patients characteristics were noted and DASH scores were retrieved at four time points, (1) preoperatively (baseline), (2) 1 month, (3) 3 months, (4) 12 months postoperatively. Scar volume formation was assessed by ultrasound at 3 months postoperatively in 28 patients. RESULTS: All groups showed a significant reduction in DASH values at 3 and 12 months postoperatively when compared to their own baseline levels. Group 3 showed the fastest and most pronounced reduction in DASH values at 1 month. Scar tissue formation was almost 57 % increased in group 1 vs group 2 and 3, however, not significant. CONCLUSION: There is no clear benefit of one incision technique over another. However, based on scar volume parameters, the significant faster recovery in the first month and the surgical ease of exposure and wound closure inclines us to favor the longitudinal incision (group 3) in future patients.

Trigger Finger: Adult and Pediatric Treatment Strategies.

Trigger fingers are common tendinopathies representing a stenosing flexor tenosynovitis of the fingers. Adult trigger finger can be treated nonsurgically using activity modification, splinting, and/or corticosteroid injections. Surgical treatment options include percutaneous A1 pulley release and open A1 pulley release. Excision of a slip of the flexor digitorum superficialis is reserved for patients with persistent triggering despite A1 release or patients with persistent flexion contracture. Pediatric trigger thumb is treated with open A1 pulley release. Pediatric trigger finger is treated with release of the A1 pulley with excision of a slip or all of the flexor digitorum superficialis if triggering persists.