Pull-out vs. suture in zone Ia-Ib flexor tendon injuries: clinical results from a multicentre cohort study.

IF 0.4 4区 医学 Q4 SURGERY Handchirurgie Mikrochirurgie Plastische Chirurgie Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-15 DOI:10.1055/a-2217-7944
Nicola Keller, Marco Guidi, Bernadette Tobler-Ammann, Vera Beckmann-Fries, Lorena Schrepfer, Alexandre Kaempfen, Esther Vögelin, Maurizio Calcagni
{"title":"Pull-out vs. suture in zone Ia-Ib flexor tendon injuries: clinical results from a multicentre cohort study.","authors":"Nicola Keller, Marco Guidi, Bernadette Tobler-Ammann, Vera Beckmann-Fries, Lorena Schrepfer, Alexandre Kaempfen, Esther Vögelin, Maurizio Calcagni","doi":"10.1055/a-2217-7944","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Several surgical techniques have been reported for flexor tendon zone 1a-b lacerations without a clear consensus on the gold standard treatment. The purpose of this multicentre study was to measure the outcomes of zone 1a-b flexor tendon injuries treated with a pull-out suture (POS) versus direct suture (DS) technique.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Fifteen patients were treated with the pull-out technique and 22 patients with a direct suture technique between 2014 and 2020. The controlled active motion (CAM) regimen protocol and a standardised follow-up schedule were used in both groups. Data on the demographics, surgery, and treatment characteristics were collected at baseline as well as at week 6 and 13 post-operatively. The primary outcome measurement was the complication rate. Secondary outcome measurements were reoperation rate, finger range of motion (ROM), strength as well as patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The patient age ranged from 18 to 75 years in both groups with all patients having a complete FDP lesion after a clean-cut injury. The complication rate was 41% in the POS group and 16% in the DS group. The reoperation rate was 29% in the POS group and 8% in the DS group. Significant between-group differences in favour of the DS group were found in the passive DIP and passive PIP+DIP ROM at week 6 and week 13. Mean hand strength was 28.7 (11.6) kg in the POS group at week 13 and 21.3 (7.9) kg in the DS group. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.012) with a medium effect size (r=-0.41). Average patient satisfaction at week 13 was 7.5 (2.2) points in the POS and 7.7 (1.3) points in the DS group. The difference between groups was not significant (p=0.839).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This register-based study demonstrates lower complication and reoperation rates with the direct suture approach compared with a pull-out button technique. Although clinical results were similar between the two surgery techniques at week 13 post-surgery, a direct suture approach should always be attempted whenever possible. If necessary, other local structures should be included to increase suture strength and allow for early active motion rehabilitation regimens.</p>","PeriodicalId":55075,"journal":{"name":"Handchirurgie Mikrochirurgie Plastische Chirurgie","volume":" ","pages":"342-349"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Handchirurgie Mikrochirurgie Plastische Chirurgie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2217-7944","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Several surgical techniques have been reported for flexor tendon zone 1a-b lacerations without a clear consensus on the gold standard treatment. The purpose of this multicentre study was to measure the outcomes of zone 1a-b flexor tendon injuries treated with a pull-out suture (POS) versus direct suture (DS) technique.

Patients and methods: Fifteen patients were treated with the pull-out technique and 22 patients with a direct suture technique between 2014 and 2020. The controlled active motion (CAM) regimen protocol and a standardised follow-up schedule were used in both groups. Data on the demographics, surgery, and treatment characteristics were collected at baseline as well as at week 6 and 13 post-operatively. The primary outcome measurement was the complication rate. Secondary outcome measurements were reoperation rate, finger range of motion (ROM), strength as well as patient satisfaction.

Results: The patient age ranged from 18 to 75 years in both groups with all patients having a complete FDP lesion after a clean-cut injury. The complication rate was 41% in the POS group and 16% in the DS group. The reoperation rate was 29% in the POS group and 8% in the DS group. Significant between-group differences in favour of the DS group were found in the passive DIP and passive PIP+DIP ROM at week 6 and week 13. Mean hand strength was 28.7 (11.6) kg in the POS group at week 13 and 21.3 (7.9) kg in the DS group. This difference was statistically significant (p=0.012) with a medium effect size (r=-0.41). Average patient satisfaction at week 13 was 7.5 (2.2) points in the POS and 7.7 (1.3) points in the DS group. The difference between groups was not significant (p=0.839).

Conclusion: This register-based study demonstrates lower complication and reoperation rates with the direct suture approach compared with a pull-out button technique. Although clinical results were similar between the two surgery techniques at week 13 post-surgery, a direct suture approach should always be attempted whenever possible. If necessary, other local structures should be included to increase suture strength and allow for early active motion rehabilitation regimens.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ia-Ib 区屈肌腱损伤的拉出与缝合:一项多中心队列研究的临床结果。
背景:针对屈肌腱1a-b区撕裂伤,已有多种手术技术被报道,但对金标准治疗方法尚未达成明确共识。这项多中心研究的目的是测量采用拉出缝合(POS)与直接缝合(DS)技术治疗 1a-b 区屈肌腱损伤的疗效:2014年至2020年期间,15名患者接受了拉出缝合技术治疗,22名患者接受了直接缝合技术治疗。两组患者均采用受控主动运动(CAM)方案和标准化随访计划。在基线以及术后第6周和第13周收集了有关人口统计学、手术和治疗特征的数据。主要测量结果是并发症发生率。次要结果测量包括再手术率、手指活动范围(ROM)、力量以及患者满意度:结果:两组患者的年龄从 18 岁到 75 岁不等,所有患者都是在干净的切口损伤后出现完整的 FDP 病变。POS组的并发症发生率为41%,DS组为16%。POS 组的再手术率为 29%,DS 组为 8%。在第6周和第13周,DS组的被动DIP和被动PIP+DIP ROM有显著的组间差异。第 13 周时,POS 组的平均手部力量为 28.7(11.6)公斤,而 DS 组为 21.3(7.9)公斤。这一差异具有统计学意义(P=0.012),效应大小为中等(r=-0.41)。第 13 周时,POS 组患者的平均满意度为 7.5 (2.2) 分,DS 组为 7.7 (1.3) 分。组间差异不显著(P=0.839):这项以登记为基础的研究表明,直接缝合方法的并发症发生率和再次手术率低于拉出按钮技术。虽然两种手术方法在术后第 13 周的临床效果相似,但应尽可能尝试直接缝合方法。如有必要,还应将其他局部结构包括在内,以增加缝合强度,并尽早进行积极的运动康复治疗。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
85
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: In Originalarbeiten und Fallberichten finden Sie die neuesten Informationen über: Diagnostik Verfahrenswahl state of the art / neueste Techniken rekonstruktive Verfahren Behandlung infolge von Traumata oder OP Bewertung der Ergebnisse Klinische Forschung Interessante Darstellung der neuesten Erkenntnisse in Originalarbeiten und Fallberichten. Exzellent veranschaulicht durch ein klares Layout und reiche Bebilderung. Überzeugen Sie sich selbst! Organschaften Organ der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Handchirurgie, Deutschen Gesellschaft für Handchirurgie und Österreichischen Gesellschaft für Handchirurgie Organ der Deutschsprachigen Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Mikrochirurgie der peripheren Nerven und Gefäße Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft der Plastischen, Rekonstruktiven und Ästhetischen Chirurgen
期刊最新文献
Unusual finger infection:  Candida magnoliae-associated arthritis/osteomyelitis and gout without a history of prior gout attacks. [Is networking in international societies dispensable in Plastic Surgery? Clear vote in favour of ESPRAS and ICOPLAST at the 54th Annual Conference of the DGPRÄC in Düsseldorf]. On occasion of the "ESPRAS - A day in Sarajevo" meeting at the 13th BAFPRAS Congress. [Postoperative Pain Level Following Surgery of the Hand and Wrist in the Ambulatory Setting]. [Palmar Displacement in Distal Radius Fractures following Extension Injuries of the Wrist].
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1