Percutaneous in situ versus open arthrodesis of the distal interphalangeal joint

K. J. Renfree

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Scopus citations

Abstract

We compared the results of percutaneous in situ arthrodesis with open arthrodesis of the distal interphalangeal joint with a headless compression screw. In the percutaneous in situ arthrodesis group (17 joints), the screw was inserted from the fingertip across the unprepared joint. In the open group (12 joints), flat cancellous surfaces were prepared before screw insertion. Solid fusion was found in 10/17 joints (59%) with percutaneous in situ arthrodesis and in 11/12 joints (92%) with open arthrodesis. Among the other seven joints with percutaneous in situ arthrodesis, six had fibrous union and were asymptomatic at a mean of 18 months, and one failed, requiring revision. One joint with open arthrodesis had fibrous union and was asymptomatic 12 months after surgery. We conclude that open arthrodesis is better than the percutaneous method, as a greater percentage achieve bone union. The open approach allows osteophyte removal and slightly better correction of angular deformity in the coronal plane.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)379-383
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Hand Surgery: European Volume
Volume40
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 9 2015

Keywords

  • Arthrodesis
  • distal interphalangeal
  • fusion
  • percutaneous

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Percutaneous in situ versus open arthrodesis of the distal interphalangeal joint'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this