Ultrasound‐guided microinvasive trigger finger release technique using an 18‐gauge needle with a blade at the tip: A prospective study

Background Open surgical trigger finger release has limited success and the risk of complications; however, percutaneous techniques offer a successful alternative. There is limited understanding of the success of percutaneous trigger finger release. Objective To prospectively evaluate the functional...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:PM & R 2022-08, Vol.14 (8), p.963-970
Hauptverfasser: Colberg, Ricardo E., Jurado Vélez, Javier A., Garrett, William Hunter, Hart, Karen, Fleisig, Glenn S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Open surgical trigger finger release has limited success and the risk of complications; however, percutaneous techniques offer a successful alternative. There is limited understanding of the success of percutaneous trigger finger release. Objective To prospectively evaluate the functional outcomes of patients with Green classification Grade 2 to 4 trigger finger treated with an ultrasound‐guided microinvasive trigger finger release using a special 18‐gauge needle with a blade at the tip. Design Prospective, case‐series study. Setting This study took place at an academic institution by one sports medicine physician (R.E.C.) with subspecialty training and certification in musculoskeletal ultrasound. Patients Sixty patients (79 cases) met criteria and agreed to participate in this study; 19 patients had multiple fingers treated. Average patient age was 62.8 years (SD 10.2). Average trigger finger severity diagnosis was Grade 3. Interventions Patients were treated with an ultrasound‐guided microinvasive trigger finger release using a special 18‐gauge needle with a blade at the tip. Main Outcome Measurements Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH), numerical rating scale (NRS), and Nirschl scores were captured preprocedure, at various time points, and at final follow‐up. Changes between preprocedure and final follow‐up were analyzed by paired t test (p 
ISSN:1934-1482
1934-1563
DOI:10.1002/pmrj.12665