Original ArticleNo Access

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

Department of Hand Surgery, Nagato General Hospital, Nagato, Yamaguchi, Japan

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yamaguchi University School of Medicine, Ube, Yamaguchi, Japan

kemuramatsu@outlook.jp

Correspondence to: Keiichi Muramatsu, Department of Hand Surgery, Nagato General Hospital, Nagato Yamaguchi, 759-4194, Japan. Tel: +81837222220, Fax: +81837226542.

Search for more papers by this author

Ma. Felma RAYEL

Department of Hand Surgery, Nagato General Hospital, Nagato, Yamaguchi, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

Jasson ARCINUE

Department of Hand Surgery, Nagato General Hospital, Nagato, Yamaguchi, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

Yasuhiro TANI

Department of Hand Surgery, Nagato General Hospital, Nagato, Yamaguchi, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

Masato KOBAYASHI

Department of Hand Surgery, Nagato General Hospital, Nagato, Yamaguchi, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

, and

Tetsuya SETO

Department of Hand Surgery, Nagato General Hospital, Nagato, Yamaguchi, Japan

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yamaguchi University School of Medicine, Ube, Yamaguchi, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424835522500096Cited by:9 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

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)

Keywords:

REFERENCES

1. Green D, Hotchkiss R, Pederson W, Wolfe S. Green’s Operative Hand Surgery. 4th ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 1999:2028–2034 Google Scholar
2. Quinnell RC. Conservative management of trigger finger. Practitioner. 1980;224:187–190. Medline, Google Scholar
3. Wang J, Zhao JG, Liang CC. Percutaneous release, open surgery, or corticosteroid injection, which is the best treatment method for trigger digits? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:1879–1886. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
4. Matthews A, Smith K, Read L, Nicholas J, Schmidt E. Trigger finger: An overview of the treatment options. JAAPA. 2019;32:17–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.jaa.0000550281.42592.97. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
5. Finsen V, Hagen S. Surgery for trigger finger. Hand Surg. 2003;8:201–203. Link, Google Scholar
6. Weiss ND, Richter MB. Percutaneous release of trigger digits. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2017;46(4):263–267. Google Scholar
7. Rajeswaran G, Lee JC, Eckersley R, Katsarma E, Healy JC. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous release of the annular pulley in trigger digit. Eur Radiol. 2009;19(9):2232–2237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-009-1397-3. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
8. Eastwood DM, Gupta KJ, Johnson DP. Percutaneous release of the trigger finger: an office procedure. J Hand Surg Am. 1992;17(1):114–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/0363-5023(92)90125-9. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
9. Lapègue F, André A, Meyrignac Oet al.. US-guided percutaneous release of the trigger finger by using a 21-gauge needle: A prospective study of 60 cases. Radiology. 2016;280:493–499. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016151886. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
10. Saengnipanthkul S, Sae-Jung S, Sumananont C. Percutaneous release of the A1 pulley using a modified Kirschner wire: A cadaveric study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2014;22(2):232–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/230949901402200225. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
11. Jou IM, Chern TC. Sonographically assisted percutaneous release of the A1 pulley: A new surgical technique for treating trigger digit. J Hand Surg Br. 2006;31:191–199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsb.2005.11.003. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
12. Duncan SFM, Kakinoki R, Dunbar R. Endoscopic trigger finger release: Surgical technique. J Hand Surg Asian Pac Vol. 2018;23(1):158–161. https://doi.org/10.1142/s2424835518710017. Link, Google Scholar
13. Lorthioir J Jr. Surgical treatment of trigger-finger by a subcutaneous method. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958;40:793–795. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-195840040-00003. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
14. Nikolaou VS, Malahias MA, Kaseta MK, Sourlas I, Babis GC. Comparative clinical study of ultrasound-guided A1 pulley release vs open surgical intervention in the treatment of trigger finger. World J Orthop. 2017;8:163–169. https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v8.i2.163. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
15. Dunn MJ, Pess GM. Percutaneous trigger finger release: A comparison of a new push knife and a 19-gauge needle in a cadaveric model. J Hand Surg Am. 1999;24(4):860–865. https://doi.org/10.1053/jhsu.1999.0860. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
16. Pan M, Sheng S, Fan Zet al.. Ultrasound-guided percutaneous release of a1 pulley by using a needle knife: A prospective study of 41 cases. Front Pharmacol. 2019;10:267. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2019.00267. Crossref, Google Scholar
17. Lee SH, Choi YC, Kang HJ. Comparative study of ultrasonography-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release versus blinded percutaneous A1 pulley release. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2018;26(2):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499018772368. Crossref, Google Scholar
18. Yasunaga H, Takeda K. Percutaneous release for trigger fingers. Cent Jpn J Orthop Traumat. 1983;26:781–786. Google Scholar
19. Patel MR, Moradia VJ. Percutaneous release of trigger digit with and without cortisone injection. J Hand Surg Am. 1997;22:150–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0363-5023(05)80196-0. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
20. Pope DF, Wolfe SW. Safety and efficacy of percutaneous trigger finger release. J Hand Surg Am. 1995;20(2):280–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0363-5023(05)80026-7. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
21. Werthel JD, Cortez M, Elhassan BT. Modified percutaneous trigger finger release. Hand Surg Rehabil. 2016;35(3):179–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hansur.2016.02.004. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
22. Gilberts EC, Beekman WH, Stevens HJ, Wereldsma JC. Prospective randomized trial of open versus percutaneous surgery for trigger digits. J Hand Surg Am. 2001;26(3):497–500. https://doi.org/10.1053/jhsu.2001.24967. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar