PDF herunterladen
J Wrist Surg
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791540
Scientific Article

Rates of Early Recovery Following Thumb Carpometacarpal Arthroplasty: Comparing Ligament Reconstruction and Tendon Interposition, Abductor Pollicis Longus Suspensionplasty, and Suture Button Suspensionplasty

Lawrence J. Lin 
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York
,
Walter Sobba
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York
,
Sophia Jacobi
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York
,
Nader Paksima
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York
,
S. Steven Yang
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York
› Institutsangaben Funding The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
› Weitere Informationen
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Background Several techniques have been previously described for the treatment of thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) arthritis, including trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), abductor pollicis longus suspensionplasty (APLS), or suture button suspensionplasty (SBS). It remains unclear whether a specific method produces faster recovery and more rapid return to function. The purpose of this study was to evaluate early clinical outcomes in patients undergoing thumb CMC arthroplasty stratified by method of treatment.

Methods This study was conducted using a registry of patients undergoing thumb CMC arthroplasty using LRTI, APLS, or SBS. Patients were grouped by technique for comparison. Patient-reported outcomes were measured using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Upper Extremity, Pain Interference, and Pain Intensity scores and compared across cohorts using analysis of variance. Regression analysis was used to determine factors associated with early clinical outcomes.

Results Note that 150 out of 201 patients met inclusion criteria for this study. Univariate regression demonstrated no difference between technique and achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) by 1 year or ∆PROMIS scores at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. Stepwise multivariate regression analysis also found that technique did not contribute significantly to postoperative outcomes. Increased baseline PROMIS Upper Extremity scores were associated with lower odds of achieving MCID (odds ratio 0.80, p < 0.001). Baseline PROMIS scores were also associated with ∆PROMIS scores at 1 and 3 months postoperatively.

Conclusion Patients undergoing thumb CMC arthroplasty via LRTI, APLS, or SBS can expect to experience similar improvements from baseline in the early postoperative period regardless of technique choice.

Keywords

thumb carpometacarpal arthritis - thumb carpometacarpal arthroplasty - ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition - abductor pollicis longus suspensionplasty - suture button suspensionplasty

Informed Consent

This study was determined to be exempt from the Institutional Review Board. Informed consent was not obtained as this was a deidentified database study that is open to use by participating institutions.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 14. Mai 2024

Angenommen: 05. September 2024

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
03. Oktober 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Haara MM, Heliövaara M, Kröger H. et al. Osteoarthritis in the carpometacarpal joint of the thumb. Prevalence and associations with disability and mortality. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86 (07) 1452-1457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Yuan F, Aliu O, Chung KC, Mahmoudi E. Evidence-based practice in the surgical treatment of thumb carpometacarpal joint arthritis. J Hand Surg Am 2017; 42 (02) 104-112.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Deutch Z, Niedermeier SR, Awan HM. Surgeon preference, influence, and treatment of thumb carpometacarpal arthritis. Hand (N Y) 2018; 13 (04) 403-411
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Walter N, Duncan E, Roskosky M, Smith TB, Shuler MS. Suture button suspensionplasty in the treatment of carpometacarpal arthritis: a retrospective analysis of one surgeon's experience over 9 years. J Hand Surg Glob Online 2020; 2 (01) 25-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Elfar JC, Burton RI. Ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition for thumb basal arthritis. Hand Clin 2013; 29 (01) 15-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 DelSignore JL, Accardi KZ. Suture suspension arthroplasty technique for basal joint arthritis reconstruction. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg 2009; 13 (04) 166-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Morais B, Botelho T, Marques N. et al. Trapeziectomy with suture-button suspensionplasty versus ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition: a randomized controlled trial. Hand Surg Rehabil 2022; 41 (01) 59-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wininger AE, Orozco EI, Han A, Burn MB, Liberman SR. Systematic comparison of ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition and suture-button suspensionplasty for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. Hand (N Y) 2023; 18 (07) 1069-1079
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Satteson ES, Driscoll C, Khan M. et al. Efficacy of abductor pollicis longus suspensionplasty compared to ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition. Hand (N Y) 2022; 17 (01) 85-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Irwin DE, Gross HE, Stucky BD. et al. Development of six PROMIS pediatrics proxy-report item banks. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2012; 10: 22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Amtmann D, Cook KF, Jensen MP. et al. Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference. Pain 2010; 150 (01) 173-182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kazmers NH, Qiu Y, Ou Z, Presson AP, Tyser AR, Zhang Y. Minimal clinically important difference of the PROMIS Upper-Extremity computer adaptive test and QuickDASH for ligament reconstruction tendon interposition patients. J Hand Surg Am 2021; 46 (06) 516-516.e7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Desai MJ, Brogan DM, Richard MJ, Mithani SK, Leversedge FJ, Ruch DS. Biomechanical comparison of suture-button suspensionplasty and LRTI for basilar thumb arthritis. Hand (N Y) 2016; 11 (04) 438-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hooke AW, Parry JA, Kakar S. Mini tightrope fixation versus ligament reconstruction - tendon interposition for maintenance of post-trapeziectomy space height: a biomechanical study. J Hand Surg Am 2016; 41 (03) 399-403
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Barrett PC, Hackley DT, Samuel LT, Apel PJ. Immobilization and hand therapy after carpometacarpal arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Hand Surg Glob Online 2022; 4 (05) 255-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Spekreijse KR, Vermeulen GM, Kedilioglu MA. et al. The effect of a bone tunnel during ligament reconstruction for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: a 5-year follow-up. J Hand Surg Am 2015; 40 (11) 2214-2222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kochevar AJ, Adham CN, Adham MN, Angel MF, Walkinshaw MD. Thumb basal joint arthroplasty using abductor pollicis longus tendon: an average 5.5-year follow-up. J Hand Surg Am 2011; 36 (08) 1326-1332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Tomaino MM, Pellegrini Jr VD, Burton RI. Arthroplasty of the basal joint of the thumb. Long-term follow-up after ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995; 77 (03) 346-355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Shonuga O, Nicholson K, Abboudi J. et al. Thumb-basal joint arthroplasty outcomes and metacarpal subsidence: a prospective cohort analysis of trapeziectomy with suture button suspensionplasty versus ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition. Hand (N Y) 2023; 18 (01) 98-104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Yao J, Song Y. Suture-button suspensionplasty for thumb carpometacarpal arthritis: a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Hand Surg Am 2013; 38 (06) 1161-1165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar