Suscribirse

Extension pin block technique versus extension orthosis for acute bony mallet finger; a retrospective comparison - 24/08/21

Doi : 10.1016/j.otsr.2020.102764 
Gurkan Gumussuyu a, Mehmet Melih Asoglu b, Olcay Guler a, Hasan May b, Adil Turan b, Ozkan Kose b,
a Department of orthopedics and traumatology, medical faculty, Altinbas university, Istanbul, Turkey 
b Department of orthopedics and traumatology, Antalya education and research hospital, Antalya, Turkey 

Corresponding author. Antalya Egitim ve Arastirma Hastanesi, Soğuksu mah. Kazım Karabekir cd., Muratpaşa, 07100 Antalya, Turkey.Antalya Egitim ve Arastirma Hastanesi, Soğuksu mah. Kazım Karabekir cd., MuratpaşaAntalya07100Turkey

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
Artículo gratuito.

Conéctese para beneficiarse!

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the clinical, radiological, aesthetic and economic outcomes of extension pin block technique and extension orthosis in closed mallet fractures with more than 1/3 of articular surface involvement without subluxation (Wehbe and Schneider classification type IB and IC).

Materials and methods

Thirty-nine patients (11 women and 28 men; mean age: 40.9±11.5 years) who had mallet fractures were retrospectively reviewed. Twenty-one patients were treated with the extension pin block technique, and the remaining 18 were treated with the extension orthosis. Fracture classification, measurement of articular surface involvement, presence of subluxation, and the fragment displacement were performed according to the Wehbe and Schneider classification. Crawford's criteria, extension lag, distal interphalangeal joint (DIPJ) range of motion, dorsal bump, and visual analog scale were evaluated. Fracture union, articular incongruity, and all other complications were followed and analyzed. The Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) was used to evaluate the aesthetic perception of the patient's finger. Direct and indirect costs were calculated for each treatment method.

Results

At the final follow-up (mean: 18.4±6.2 months), there was no significant difference with respect to clinical outcomes between groups (p=0.335) and pain (p=0.131). Fracture union was achieved in all cases. Both extension lag (p=0.150) and DIPJ flexion (p=0.261) were not different between groups. Dorsal bump was more frequent in the conservative treatment group (p=0.048). Aesthetic scores were similar between groups (p=0.477), but female patients rated significantly lower aesthetic scores than males (p=0.003) regardless of the treatment method. The direct medical (p=0.001), indirect (p=0.009) and cumulative costs (p=0.001) were significantly higher in surgical treatment group. One pin tract infection, one nail dystrophy, and one joint space narrowing were seen in the surgical treatment group versus none in the conservative treatment group (p=0.698).

Conclusions

Conservative treatment does not result in inferior clinical, radiographic and aesthetic outcomes compared to surgical fixation in closed mallet fractures with more than 1/3 of articular surface involvement without subluxation. Extension orthosis which is non-invasive, and cheap, maybe the treatment of choice in closed mallet fractures.

Level of evidence

IV; Retrospective cohort.

El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Mallet finger, Bony mallet, Extension pin block, Conservative treatment, Extension splinting


Esquema


© 2020  Elsevier Masson SAS. Reservados todos los derechos.
Añadir a mi biblioteca Eliminar de mi biblioteca Imprimir
Exportación

    Exportación citas

  • Fichero

  • Contenido

Vol 107 - N° 5

Artículo 102764- septembre 2021 Regresar al número
Artículo precedente Artículo precedente
  • Long-term outcome of a “short” anterograde homodigital neurovascular island flap with a simple or double V-Y plasty
  • Daniel Estoppey, Germain Pomares, Thomas Jager
| Artículo siguiente Artículo siguiente
  • Open dorsal distal interphalangeal joint dislocations: A report of 20 cases
  • Terrence Jose Jerome

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Mi cuenta


Declaración CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM se declara a la CNIL, la declaración N º 1286925.

En virtud de la Ley N º 78-17 del 6 de enero de 1978, relativa a las computadoras, archivos y libertades, usted tiene el derecho de oposición (art.26 de la ley), el acceso (art.34 a 38 Ley), y correcta (artículo 36 de la ley) los datos que le conciernen. Por lo tanto, usted puede pedir que se corrija, complementado, clarificado, actualizado o suprimido información sobre usted que son inexactos, incompletos, engañosos, obsoletos o cuya recogida o de conservación o uso está prohibido.
La información personal sobre los visitantes de nuestro sitio, incluyendo su identidad, son confidenciales.
El jefe del sitio en el honor se compromete a respetar la confidencialidad de los requisitos legales aplicables en Francia y no de revelar dicha información a terceros.


Todo el contenido en este sitio: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, sus licenciantes y colaboradores. Se reservan todos los derechos, incluidos los de minería de texto y datos, entrenamiento de IA y tecnologías similares. Para todo el contenido de acceso abierto, se aplican los términos de licencia de Creative Commons.