RSS-Feed abonnieren
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1788664
A Prospective Comparative Study of Ray Resection versus Amputation through Proximal Phalanx for Nonviable Digits of Upper Limb
Funding None.
Abstract
Background Finger amputations aim at preserving function and optimizing cosmesis. The crucial decision here is whether to preserve a stump or to do a ray amputation. The present study aimed to compare the functional outcome and postoperative quality of life after ray amputation or amputation through the proximal phalanx.
Materials and Methods A prospective study was conducted from January 2019 to June 2020 in patients requiring single-finger amputation through the proximal phalanx or metacarpal. Patients were divided into two groups; Group A: amputation through the proximal phalanx and Group B: ray amputation of the finger. The following functional parameters were assessed: grip strength, hand circumference, palmar volume, and webspace span. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) score was employed to score hand function and aesthesis at 6 months in both hands.
Results Thirty patients were enrolled. Findings in 26 patients (52 hands) were subjected to further analysis, 12 in Group A and 14 in Group B. Patients in both groups lost grip strength significantly compared with their contralateral normal hands (29.22 ± 14.88 [Group A] and 34.57 ± 19.12 [Group B]); however, it was statistically nonsignificant between the two groups. There was reduced mean palmar circumference in both groups' involved hands, but the decrease in circumference was statistically significant, only for Group B. Group B patients scored better in all the six subscales of the MHQ; however, only the Aesthetics score was significantly superior. The operated hand's webspace span increased significantly with respect to the normal contralateral web by a mean of 4.55 mm.
Conclusion The study concluded that both the surgical options for the level of amputation should be discussed with the patients in detail, taking into account their occupational and personal requirements. Our study findings will help to objectively counsel the patients regarding expectations in functional and aesthetic outcomes following either technique.
Keywords
ray - resection - amputation - digits - comparison - proximal - phalanx - Michigan score - hand gripNote
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5).
Ethical Approval
This study was approved by the Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India, with Ethics Committee Reference Number INT/EC/2019/000807, dated: April 10, 2019.
Patients' Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Publikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
30. Juli 2024
© 2024. Association of Plastic Surgeons of India. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Pillet J. The aesthetic hand prosthesis. Orthop Clin North Am 1981; 12 (04) 961-969
- 2 Peimer CA, Wheeler DR, Barrett A, Goldschmidt PG. Hand function following single ray amputation. J Hand Surg Am 1999; 24 (06) 1245-1248
- 3 Heinze ZCM, Wilkens SC, Lunn KN, Ring D, Chen NC. Factors associated with secondary ray amputation after initial finger amputation at the traumatic level. Hand Microsurg J 2020; 9 (02) 76-80
- 4 Blazar PE, Garon MT. Ray resections of the fingers: indications, techniques, and outcomes. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2015; 23 (08) 476-484
- 5 Shauver MJ, Chung KC. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire after 15 years of field trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131 (05) 779e-787e
- 6 Wolte MT, Shauver MJ, Chung KC. Normative values of the Michigan Hand Outcomes questionnaire for patients with and without hand conditions. Plast Reconstr Surg J 2017; 140: 425e-433e
- 7 Chung KC, Pillsbury MS, Walters MR, Hayward RA. Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. J Hand Surg Am 1998; 23 (04) 575-587
- 8 Karle B, Wittemann M, Germann G. [Functional outcome and quality of life after ray amputation versus amputation through the proximal phalanx of the index finger]. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 2002; 34 (01) 30-35
- 9 Nuzumlali E, Orhun E, Oztürk K, Cepel S, Polatkan S. Results of ray resection and amputation for ring avulsion injuries at the proximal interphalangeal joint. J Hand Surg [Br] 2003; 28 (06) 578-581
- 10 Bhat AK, Acharya AM, Narayanakurup JK, Kumar B, Nagpal PS, Kamath A. Functional and cosmetic outcome of single-digit ray amputation in hand. Musculoskelet Surg 2017; 101 (03) 275-281
- 11 Melikyan EY, Beg MS, Woodbridge S, Burke FD. The functional results of ray amputation. Hand Surg 2003; 8 (01) 47-51
- 12 Steichen JB, Idler RS. Results of central ray resection without bony transposition. J Hand Surg Am 1986; 11 (04) 466-474
- 13 Colen L, Bunkis J, Gordon L, Walton R. Functional assessment of ray transfer for central digital loss. J Hand Surg Am 1985; 10 (02) 232-237
- 14 Murray JF, Carman W, MacKenzie JK. Transmetacarpal amputation of the index finger: a clinical assessment of hand strength and complications. J Hand Surg Am 1977; 2 (06) 471-481
- 15 Peacock EE. Metacarpal transfer following amputation of a central digit. Plast Reconstr Surg 1962; 29 (04) 345-355