Complications Following Endoscopic and Open Trigger Finger Release: A Retrospective Comparative Study

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.

Single-Incision Endoscopic Trigger Finger Release

Trigger finger surgery is a commonly performed open procedure with known potential complications of infection, stiffness, pain, nerve injury, bowstringing, and incomplete release of the A1 pulley. We present a novel single-incision endoscopic trigger finger release technique that moves the incision from the palm to the palmar-digital crease, leading to less pain, scarring, and stiffness. We believe that this technique is technically simple, fast, and may decrease the risk of complications commonly encountered with open trigger finger release. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic IV.

Single-Portal Antegrade Endoscopic Trigger Finger Release: Cadaveric and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to examine the relationship between anatomical surface landmarks in fresh frozen cadavers as related to in vivo endoscopic trigger finger release (ETFR) and present clinical outcomes after a single-portal antegrade ETFR technique.

METHODS

Endoscopic trigger finger release was performed on 40 cadaveric digits. Each digit was dissected and the following measurements were recorded: distance from palmar digital crease and A1 pulley, length of the A1 pulley, percentage of A1 pulley released, and injury to vulnerable anatomy. A retrospective chart review was performed on 48 patients (62 digits) treated with ETFR. Outcome measures included grip and pinch strength, range of motion, Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaires, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores.

RESULTS

Release of the A1 pulley was achieved in 33 of the 40 cadaveric digits (83%) with an A2 pulley laceration rate of 25%. No flexor tendon or neurovascular injuries occurred. Gross grasp, lateral pinch, 3-jaw chuck, and precision pinch strength had 85%, 90%, 82%, and 90% recovery, respectively. At the final follow-up, average metacarpophalangeal joint, proximal interphalangeal joint, and distal interphalangeal joint range of motion were within the normal limits. Mean VAS scores decreased from 5.7 preoperatively to 1.0 postoperatively and mean DASH score at the final follow-up was 4.8.

CONCLUSIONS

With the use of anatomical surface landmarks, ETFR may be performed in an efficient and reproducible manner. Patients treated with ETFR had low complication rates, good functional recovery, and improved pain at short-term follow-up. Further study of long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness of ETFR is warranted.