Ultrasound-Guided A1 Pulley Release: A Systematic Review

Ultrasound-guided vs. non-guided trigger finger release: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Trigger finger (TF) is a common hand condition that can be treated with surgery. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether ultrasound-guided (US-guided) percutaneous surgery is superior to other conventional surgical methods.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies. We included randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing US-guided TF release with blind percutaneous or open approaches. We combined Risk Ratios (RR) and Mean Differences (MD) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) across studies. Data processing and analysis were conducted using R software, version 4.3.1.

RESULTS

Our analysis included eight RCTs and two observational studies with 555 patients. US-guided surgery significantly reduced postoperative DASH scores (MD -3.75 points; 95% CI = -7.48, -0.02; p < 0.01), shortened time to resume activities (MD -11.52 days; 95% CI = -16.13, -6.91; p < 0.01), hastened discontinuation of oral analgesics (MD -4.44 days; 95% CI = -8.01, -0.87; p < 0.01), and improved patient satisfaction scores (RR 1.13; 95% CI = 1.04, 1.23; p = 0.75). There were no significant differences in VAS scores, time to movement recovery, or surgical success rate.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous release is a safe, effective, and superior alternative for treating TF compared to other methods, leading to improved DASH scores, quicker recovery, faster cessation of oral analgesics, and enhanced patient satisfaction.

The Outcomes of 2,154 Endoscopic Trigger Finger Releases

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger is one of the most frequent causes of hand pain and disability. Recently, an endoscopic trigger finger release technique was developed, but outcomes have rarely been reported. Here, we present the outcomes of 2154 endoscopic trigger finger release procedures in a single center.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 2154 endoscopic trigger finger release procedures were performed on 2034 patients. Outcome assessment at 90 days after surgery was classified as excellent, good, fair or poor according to a combination of patient satisfaction with the scar and pain at rest or under load on a numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

The therapeutic outcomes were: 1027 excellent, 607 good, 400 fair, and none poor. No major surgical complications were observed. Minor complications occurred in 231 fingers (10.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

All patients were satisfied with their outcome after endoscopic trigger finger release. Endoscopic release can be an effective and efficient therapeutic method for the treatment of trigger finger.

Efficacy of Ultrasound-Guided Tendon Release for Trigger Finger Compared With Open Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger (also known as stenosing tenosynovitis) is a chronic inflammatory disorder that affects the fingers and causes discomfort and functional impairment. It is estimated to affect 2-3.6% of the population and is more common in manual laborers and individuals engaged in repetitive hand activities. This study comprehensively compares the efficacy of ultrasound-guided release versus traditional open surgery in treating trigger fingers.

MATERIALS

We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria were studies evaluating ultrasound-guided release of trigger finger (grade 2 and higher) compared with open surgical release. A meta-analysis was performed by Revman software 5.4.1 to assess efficacy, utilizing appropriate statistical methods to address heterogeneity. Primary outcome measures included "Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand" (QDASH) scores, Grip strength, and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Secondary outcome measures included Days of stopping analgesia, full-digit flexion and extension, days to return to normal activities, pinch strength, Quinnell grading score, and bow strengthening.

RESULTS

Out of the initial pool of 820 studies, five met the inclusion criteria, including 275 patients with 283 trigger digits. The analysis revealed significant differences favoring the ultrasound-guided release group over the surgical group for improvement in Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score in the first month (MD -0.48, 95% CI: 0.75 to -0.2, P = .0007, I2  = 20%). The difference was not statistically significant in the 3-month follow-up period (MD -2.25, 95% CI: -0.54 to 0.05, P = .1, I2  = 0%). Additionally, there is a significant difference in the days required for return to normal activities in favor of the ultrasound release approach (MD -13.78, 95% CI: -16.68 to 10.89, P = .00001, I2  = 68%). The data displayed heterogeneity, which was resolved through sensitivity analysis that also favored the ultrasound-guided group. In terms of grip strength, full-digit flexion and extension, VAS, and days of stopping analgesia no significant differences were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrasound-guided release showed advantages over open surgical release, resulting in improved QDASH score and quicker return to normal activities. This offers a minimally invasive, successful alternative to open surgery, reducing associated risks. Further studies with long-term follow-up are recommended.