Current flexor and extensor tendon motion regimens: a summary

Complex regional pain syndrome type II localized to the index finger. A case report translating scientific evidence into clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Complex regional pain syndrome type II (CRPS-II) is a rare condition associated with peripheral nervous system lesions. Its localized distribution in the fingers is unique, and its treatment is unclear.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 56-year-old male presented to the emergency department with a saw-cut index finger injury with associated tendon and nerve injuries. After surgery, he was admitted to physical therapy (PT) with persistent pain, joint stiffness, allodynia, and trophic changes compatible with CRPS-II localized in the index finger. The diagnosis was confirmed after applying the Budapest Criteria, and PT was progressive and individualized according to the patient's needs, including graded motor imagery, mobilizations, exercises, and education.

OUTCOMES

After 12 weeks of PT, a clinically significant decrease in pain intensity and improvements in mobility and index finger and upper limb functionality was observed, reducing CRPS symptomatology.

DISCUSSION

This report provides information about a unique case of a localized form of CRPS-II. After reviewing the literature on clinical cases of both CRPS-II and localized forms of CRPS, we highlight that the clinical features of this patient and his positive therapeutic response support the importance of translating the scientific evidence on CRPS into clinical practice.

Flexor Tendon Repair: Avoidance and Management of Complications

The proper technique for flexor tendon repair has been well established through numerous bench science and clinical studies. However, less is known about strategies to avoid and manage postoperative complications. This article discusses the common complications after flexor tendon repair, such as repair site rupture and adhesion formation. This article also addresses strategies to prevent and manage these complications. The foundation for preventing many of these complications is ensuring a strong repair without gapping at time zero, which will enable the accrual of tensile strength through early initiation of motion.

Tenolysis and Salvage Procedures

Complications in flexor tendon repair are common and include tendon rupture, adhesion formation, and joint contracture. Risk factors include preexisting conditions, gross contamination, concurrent fracture, early unplanned loading of the repaired tendon, premature cessation of splinting, and aggressive early active range of motion protocols with insufficient repair strength. Rupture of a repaired tendon should be followed by early operative exploration, debridement, and revision with a four-core strand suture and nonbraided epitendinous suture. Wide-awake flexor tenolysis should be considered when adhesion formation results in the plateaued range of motion, and passive motion exceeds active motion. Two-staged reconstruction is recommended when injury results in excessive scaring, joint contracture, or an incompetent pulley apparatus.

Autonomous Patient-Controlled Mobilization Protocol After Flexor Tendon Repair: A Case Series

BACKGROUND

Despite many publications on rehabilitation after repair of flexor tendon injuries of the hand, there is no consensus as to which method is superior. It is clear that nonadherence to postoperative therapy adversely affects the outcome after flexor tendon surgery. In the context of a developing country, the most important factor associated with poor outcome is late onset of rehabilitation therapy. An autonomous rehabilitation program is proposed, with the use of a low-cost splint and based on an online illustrative video with the expectation to improve adherence and patient compliance, thus ensuring satisfactory outcome.

METHODS

Twenty-two consecutive digits of 14 patients after flexor tendon repair in zone II were included. Autonomous early passive mobilization physical therapy and splinting started shortly after surgery, supported by an online available video depicting prescribed exercises; follow-up was continued until postoperative week 20. Patients were evaluated regarding range of motion, grip strength, and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) disability scale.

RESULTS

Range of motion after 20 weeks according to the scoring system of the American Society of Surgery of Hand was excellent in 4, good in 11, and fair in 4 fingers. The mean total active motion score was 86% (95% confidence interval, 78%-93%). The mean grip strength at final follow-up was 86% of the contralateral hand. The mean QuickDASH score was 12.5 (2.3-31.8).

CONCLUSION

This protocol achieves good results in range of motion and early return of function of the hand. We propose this simple, nonexpensive method to developing countries with less than optimal availability of health care.

Variation in patient information and rehabilitation regimens after flexor tendon repair in the United Kingdom

Introduction

There is clinical uncertainty regarding the optimal method of rehabilitation following flexor tendon repair. Many splint designs and rehabilitation regimens are reported in the literature; however, there is insufficient evidence to support the use of any one regimen. The aim of this study was to describe rehabilitation guidelines used in the United Kingdom (UK) following zone I/II flexor tendon repair.

Methods

Using a cross-sectional design, hand units in the UK were invited to complete a short survey and to upload their flexor tendon rehabilitation guidelines and patient information material. Approval was granted by the British Association of Hand Therapists. Data were extracted in duplicate, using a pre-piloted form, and analysed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Thirty-five hand units responded (21%), providing 52 treatment guidelines. Three splinting regimens were described, and all involved early active mobilisation: (i) long dorsal-blocking splint (DBS); (ii) short DBS; and (iii) relative motion flexion splint. Duration of full-time splint wear ranged from 4 to 6 weeks. There were variations in splint design and composition of home exercise programmes, particularly for the long DBS. Where reported, recommended return to driving ranged from 8 to 12 weeks, and return to light work activities ranged from 5 to 10 weeks.

Discussion

Treatment guidelines varied across UK hand therapy departments, suggesting that patients receive differing advice about how to protect, move and use their hand after zone I/II flexor tendon repair. The disparity in splint wear duration, home exercise frequency and prescribed functional restrictions raises potential financial and social implications for patients. Future research should explore rehabilitation burden in addition to clinical outcomes.

Secondary Procedures following Flexor Tendon Reconstruction

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Understand the indications and management options for secondary flexor tendon reconstruction, including tenolysis, tendon grafting, and tendon transfers. 2. Understand the reconstructive options for pulley reconstruction. 3. Understand the options for management of isolated flexor digitorum profundus injuries.

SUMMARY

Despite current advances in flexor tendon repair, complications can still occur following surgery. This article presents the spectrum of treatment options for secondary flexor tendon reconstruction ranging from tenolysis to one- and two-stage tendon grafting, and tendon transfers. In addition, an overview of pulley reconstruction and the treatment of isolated flexor digitorum profundus injuries are discussed. A management algorithm for secondary flexor tendon reconstruction is provided.

Tensile load on the flexor digitorum profundus tendon during palmar and lateral blocking exercises: Influence on blocking force and distal interphalangeal joint flexion angle

STUDY DESIGN

This is a basic science research.

INTRODUCTION

Isolating excursion of the flexor digitorum profundus (FDP) in zones I and II is common practice in the current management after flexor tendon repair. During this procedure, the proximal interphalangeal joint is sometimes fully extended with unmeasured external forces at the middle phalanx when the distal interphalangeal joint is actively flexed.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of the study was to investigate the incremental effect of external force with palmar blocking versus lateral blocking and increased angles of flexion on internal tendon forces at the repair site for a safer application of force by the treating therapist.

METHODS

Eight human cadaveric fingers were studied. To simulate palmar or lateral finger blocking, a compression force of blocking was applied from 5N (510 grams) to 25N (2,550 grams) on the skin surface of the palmar or the lateral aspect of each of these middle phalanges in 5N increments. The tensile load on the FDP tendon during distal interphalangeal joint flexion from 0° to 60° was measured in 10° increments.

RESULTS

During palmar blocking, the tensile load was significantly increased with increases in palmar blocking force. However, no significant increase in the tensile load on the FDP tendon was observed at any lateral blocking.

DISCUSSION

Lateral blocking exercise can be performed with less tensile force on the FDP tendon when performing blocking exercise after flexor tendon injury repair.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the concept that lateral blocking with incremental joint angles allows a safer application of force for the healing tendon.

[Extensor tendon injuries at the level of the proximal interphalangeal joint]

Closed and open injuries of the extensor mechanism at the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint can involve the central slip, the lateral slips or both. They are classified as zone III injuries. All open injuries on the dorsal side of the PIP joint should raise suspicion of an extensor tendon injury that is frequently overlooked. The operative strategy consists of wound revision with extensor tendon suture or refixation of the central slip. Acute closed central slip injuries are clinically diagnosed (Elson test) after ruling out bony injuries to the joint. Nondisplaced avulsions of the central slip insertion or lacerations can be treated nonoperatively by splinting. For displaced avulsions and complex injuries the treatment is surgical. In overlooked injuries a typical deformity (buttonhole/Boutonnière deformity) develops within 1-2 weeks that is characterized by an extension lag of the PIP joint and hyperextension at the distal interphalangeal joint. In early cases, when passive extension is still complete (mobile buttonhole deformity) the central slip can be immediately reconstructed. In fixed deformities complete passive extension of the PIP joint has to be restored before surgery by hand therapeutic measures or PIP joint release. Depending on the pattern of the injury and the resulting defects, a number of reconstructive techniques have been established that are summarized in this article. The functional results can be limited by tendon adhesions, imbalance within the reconstructed extensor apparatus and stiff joints that can all restrict the range of motion. Therefore, active rehabilitation protocols are mandatory for optimal results.

Ultrasonographic assessment in vivo of the excursion and tension of flexor digitorum profundus tendon on different rehabilitation protocols after tendon repair

STUDY DESIGN

Interpretive description study.

PURPOSE

In management of patients with flexion tendon injuries, passive, control active and active motion protocols were proposed after repair to minimize tendon adhesion. The purpose of this study was to compare the excursion distance and the tension of Flexor Digitorum Profundus (FDP) during simulated active and passive motion using ultrasonography techniques using normal subjects.

METHODS

Ultrasonographic assessment of FDP tendon of the middle finger was performed at the wrist level on 20 healthy college students using 3 types of treatment protocols: modified Kleinert protocol, modified Duran protocol, and active finger flexion protocol. The excursion distance was measured following the musculotendinous junction of FDP using the B mode ultrasound system. The elasticity of FDP tendon was measured using the shear wave elastography technique. The excursion distance and the elasticity value were compared among 3 protocols using one-way ANOVA analysis.

RESULTS

Twelve male and 8 female students with mean age of 22.6 ± 1.8 years were invited to join the study. The excursion distance of FDP was 21.82 ± 3.77 mm using the active finger flexion protocol, 8.59 ± 2.59 mm using the modified Duran protocol, and 12.26 ± 2.71 mm using the modified Kleinert protocol. The elasticity was significantly higher in extension position when compared to passive flexion positions, but found lower than active flexion position.

DISCUSSION

The active finger protocol was found to require strongest tension of the tendon and with longest excursion. There was similar tension generated using both passive motion protocols. The modified Duran protocol appeared to create less excursion upon movements than the modified Kleinert approach using the objective ultrasonic evaluation. It is suggested that if the surgical repair was strong and without any complications, the active flexion protocol might work best to regain tension excursion. However, if there are complex problems involved, then the Kleinert approach or Duran approach would be chosen.

Rehabilitation following surgery for flexor tendon injuries of the hand

BACKGROUND

Various rehabilitation treatments may be offered following surgery for flexor tendon injuries of the hand. Rehabilitation often includes a combination of an exercise regimen and an orthosis, plus other rehabilitation treatments, usually delivered together. The effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of different rehabilitation interventions after surgery for flexor tendon injuries of the hand.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, two additional databases and two international trials registries, unrestricted by language. The last date of searches was 11 August 2020. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared any postoperative rehabilitation intervention with no intervention, control, placebo, or another postoperative rehabilitation intervention in individuals who have had surgery for flexor tendon injuries of the hand. Trials comparing different mobilisation regimens either with another mobilisation regimen or with a control were the main comparisons of interest. Our main outcomes of interest were patient-reported function, active range of motion of the fingers, and number of participants experiencing an adverse event.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and assessed the quality of the body of evidence for primary outcomes using the GRADE approach, according to standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 RCTs and one quasi-RCT, with a total of 1108 participants, mainly adults. Overall, the participants were aged between 7 and 72 years, and 74% were male. Studies mainly focused on flexor tendon injuries in zone II. The 17 studies were heterogeneous with respect to the types of rehabilitation treatments provided, intensity, duration of treatment and the treatment setting. Each trial tested one of 14 comparisons, eight of which were of different exercise regimens. The other trials examined the timing of return to unrestricted functional activities after surgery (one study); the use of external devices applied to the participant to facilitate mobilisation, such as an exoskeleton (one study) or continuous passive motion device (one study); modalities such as laser therapy (two studies) or ultrasound therapy (one study); and a motor imagery treatment (one study). No trials tested different types of orthoses; different orthosis wearing regimens, including duration; different timings for commencing mobilisation; different types of scar management; or different timings for commencing strengthening. Trials were generally at high risk of bias for one or more domains, including lack of blinding, incomplete outcome data and selective outcome reporting. Data pooling was limited to tendon rupture data in a three trial comparison. We rated the evidence available for all reported outcomes of all comparisons as very low-certainty evidence, which means that we have very little confidence in the estimates of effect. We present the findings from three exercise regimen comparisons, as these are commonly used in clinical current practice. Early active flexion plus controlled passive exercise regimen versus early controlled passive exercise regimen (modified Kleinert protocol) was compared in one trial of 53 participants with mainly zone II flexor tendon repairs. There is very low-certainty evidence of no clinically important difference between the two groups in patient-rated function or active finger range of motion at 6 or 12 months follow-up. There is very low-certainty evidence of little between-group difference in adverse events: there were 15 overall. All three tendon ruptures underwent secondary surgery. An active exercise regimen versus an immobilisation regimen for three weeks was compared in one trial reporting data for 84 participants with zone II flexor tendon repairs. The trial did not report on self-rated function, on range of movement during three to six months or numbers of participants experiencing adverse events. The very low-certainty evidence for poor (under one-quarter that of normal) range of finger movement at one to three years follow-up means we are uncertain of the finding of zero cases in the active group versus seven cases in the immobilisation regimen. The same uncertainty applies to the finding of little difference between the two groups in adverse events (5 tendon ruptures in the active group versus 10 probable scar adhesion in the immobilisation group) indicated for surgery. Place and hold exercise regimen performed within an orthosis versus a controlled passive regimen using rubber band traction was compared in three heterogeneous trials, which reported data for a maximum of 194 participants, with mainly zone II flexor tendon repairs. The trials did not report on range of movement during three to six months, or numbers of participants experiencing adverse events. There was very low-certainty evidence of no difference in self-rated function using the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) functional assessment between the two groups at six months (one trial) or at 12 months (one trial). There is very low-certainty evidence from one trial of greater active finger range of motion at 12 months after place and hold. Secondary surgery data were not available; however, all seven recorded tendon ruptures would have required surgery. All the evidence for the other five exercise comparisons as well as those of the other six comparisons made by the included studies was incomplete and, where available, of very low-certainty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of evidence from RCTs on most of the rehabilitation interventions used following surgery for flexor tendon injuries of the hand. The limited and very low-certainty evidence for all 14 comparisons examined in the 17 included studies means that we have very little confidence in the estimates of effect for all outcomes for which data were available for these comparisons. The dearth of evidence identified in this review points to the urgent need for sufficiently powered RCTs that examine key questions relating to the rehabilitation of these injuries. A consensus approach identifying these and establishing minimum study conduct and reporting criteria will be valuable. Our suggestions for future research are detailed in the review.

Flexor tendon rehabilitation in the 21st century: A systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

INTRODUCTION

The rehabilitation of patients following flexor tendon injury has progressed from immobilization to true active flexion with the addition of wrist motion over the last 75 years.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This review specifically intended to determine whether there is evidence to support one type of exercise regimen, early passive, place and hold, or true active, as superior for producing safe and maximal range of motion following flexor tendon repair.

METHODS

The preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA-P 2015) checklist was utilized to format the review. Both reviewers collaborated on all aspects of the research, including identifying inclusion/exclusion factors, search terms, reading and scoring articles, and authoring the paper. Articles were independently scored by each reviewer using the Structured Effectiveness Quality Evaluation Scale (SEQES).

RESULTS

A total of nine intervention studies that included a rehabilitative comparison group were systematically reviewed: one pediatric, four comparing passive flexion protocols to place and hold flexion, and four comparing true active flexion to passive and/or place and hold flexion.

DISCUSSION

This review provides moderate to strong evidence that place and hold exercises provide better outcomes than passive flexion protocols for patients with two to six-strand repairs. The studies included in this review suffered from methodological limitations including short timeframes for follow-up, unequal group distribution, and limited attention to repair site strength.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a lack of superior benefits following true active motion regimens, there is not sufficient evidence to support true active motion as an effective or preferable choice for flexor tendon rehabilitation at this time.

Therapeutic management of closed central slip injuries: Outcome of a service evaluation

Introduction

Closed central slip injuries can be difficult to manage and there is a lack of published research to support evidence-based clinical decision making in practice. This article presents the results of a service review in a busy trauma hospital hand therapy department.

Method

Following a literature review and retrospective review of outcomes, new clinical guidelines for central slip injuries were developed. These were implemented with 22 patients referred to hand therapy for conservative management of closed central slip injuries during a one-year period.

Results

The majority of patients (72%) had either an excellent or good outcome using the Strickland-Glogovac outcome measure and an average total active motion of 90% compared to their unaffected hand.

Conclusions

The outcomes following implementation of new treatment guidelines following the service review are in line with the small amount of published data currently available. They provide detailed guidelines for the conservative management of closed central slip injuries in a busy out-patient setting.

Flexor Tendon Reconstruction

Improved methods of primary flexor tendon repair have diminished the need for tendon reconstruction. Nonetheless, reconstruction remains an option for neglected digital flexor tendon lacerations and for failed flexor tendon repair in patients who have a supple, sensate finger and who are able to comply with an extensive rehabilitation program. Preoperative and intraoperative findings dictate whether a one-stage or two-stage procedure is appropriate. The first stage of a two-stage procedure involves insertion of a silicone rod-and-pulley reconstruction; at the second stage, the rod is replaced with a tendon graft. Some improvements have been made in surgical techniques as well as rehabilitation protocols. Future techniques, such as tissue engineering, may provide better functional results.

Rehabilitation following zone II flexor tendon repairs

Ongoing clinical and basic research has improved understanding of flexor tendon mechanics and physiology for surgical repair and rehabilitation after a zone II flexor tendon repair. Yet, the ideal surgical repair technique that includes sufficient strength to allow safe immediate active motion of the finger, without excessive repair stiffness, bulk or rough surfaces resulting in excessive resistance to flexion, does not exist. After optimizing the repair, the surgeon and therapist team must select a rehabilitation plan that protects the repair but helps to maintain tendon gliding. There are 3 types of rehabilitation programs for flexor tendon repairs: delayed mobilization, early passive mobilization, or an early active mobilization. No guideline for rehabilitation should be followed exactly. Many factors influence therapy decisions, including repair technique, associated tendon healing, passive versus active range of motion, edema, and tendon adhesions. These factors can assist in guiding rehabilitation progression and promote functional range of motion, safely mobilize the repaired tendon(s) and prevent gapping, rupture, and adhesions.

Single-Stage Flexor Tendon Grafting: Refining the Steps

Single-stage tendon grafting for reconstruction of zone I and II flexor tendon injuries is a challenging procedure in hand surgery. Careful patient selection, strict indications, and adherence to sound surgical principles are mandatory for return of digital motion.

Spontaneous Zone III rupture of the flexor tendons of the ulnar three digits in elderly Korean farmers

Spontaneous flexor tendon rupture is a rare condition and the aetiology is not clear. We report 12 elderly Korean farmers with spontaneous flexor tendon ruptures. We found the rupture in the dominant hand in ten patients. A rupture in the little finger was found in all 12 patients (seven with both flexor tendons ruptured and five with only the profundus ruptured), in the ring finger in four patients (the profundus ruptured in all and both flexor tendons in two patients), and in the middle finger a partial rupture of the profundus in one patient. The tendons were ruptured close to the hook of the hamate. Repetitive friction between the flexor tendons and the hamate hook may cause the ruptures. The hamate hook was excised and the ruptured profundus tendons were reconstructed with tendon transfers with quite favourable functional recovery at follow-up of 1 to 2 years. The ruptured superficialis tendons were not reconstructed. Level of Evidence IV.

Rehabilitation of the upper extremity following nerve and tendon reconstruction: when and how

Following upper extremity nerve and tendon reconstruction, rehabilitation is necessary to achieve optimal function and outcome. In this review, the authors present current evidence and literature regarding the strategies and techniques of rehabilitation following peripheral nerve and tendon reconstruction.

Primary flexor tendon repair in zones 1 and 2: early passive mobilization versus controlled active motion

PURPOSE

To compare early passive mobilization (EPM) with controlled active motion (CAM) after flexor tendon surgery in zones 1 and 2.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of collected data of all patients receiving primary flexor tendon repair in zones 1 and 2 from 2006 to 2011, during which time 228 patients were treated, and 191 patients with 231 injured digits were eligible for study. Exclusion criteria were replantation, finger revascularization, age younger than 16 years, rehabilitation by means other than EPM or CAM, and missing information regarding postoperative rehabilitation. This left 132 patients with 159 injured fingers for analysis. The primary endpoint was the comparison of total active motion (TAM) values 4 and 12 weeks after surgery between the EPM and the CAM protocols. The analysis of TAM measurements under the rehabilitation protocols was conducted using t-tests and further linear modeling. We defined rupture rate and the assessment of adhesion/infection as secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant difference between the TAM values of the EPM and the CAM protocols 4 weeks after surgery. At 12 weeks, however, there was no significant difference between the 2 protocols. Older age and injuries with finger fractures were associated with lower TAM values. Rupture rates were 5% (CAM) and 7% (EPM), which were not statistically different.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed a favorable effect of CAM protocol on TAM 4 weeks after surgery. The percent rupture rate was slightly lower in the patients with CAM than in the patients with EPM regime. Further studies are required to confirm our results and to investigate whether faster recovery of TAM is associated with shorter time out of work.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic III.

IFSSH Flexor Tendon Committee report 2014: from the IFSSH Flexor Tendon Committee (Chairman: Jin Bo Tang)

Hand surgeons continue to search for the best surgical flexor tendon repair and treatment of the tendon sheaths and pulleys, and they are attempting to establish postoperative regimens that fit diverse clinical needs. It is the purpose of this report to present the current views, methods, and suggestions of six senior hand surgeons from six different countries - all experienced in tendon repair and reconstruction. Although certainly there is common ground, the report presents provocative views and approaches. The report reflects an update in the views of the committee. We hope that it is helpful to surgeons and therapists in treating flexor tendon injuries.