3-Dimensional fasciectomy: A highly efficacious common ground approach to Dupuytren’s surgery

Background Numerous Dupuytren’s fasciectomy techniques have been described, each associated with unique surgical challenges, complications and recurrence rates. We describe a common ground surgical approach to Dupuytren’s disease; 3-dimensional fasciectomy (3DF). 3DF aims to address the potential contributors to the high recurrence rate of Dupuytren’s disease and unite current limited fasciectomy practice that varies considerably between surgeons.

Methods We describe the 3DF principles; raising thin skin flaps (addressing dermal involvement), excising diseased palmar fascia with a 3−5 mm clearance margin (treating highly locally recurrent conditions) and excising the vertical septae of Legueu and Juvara (providing deep clearance, hence addressing all potentially involved pathological tissue). The surgical outcomes between traditional limited fasciectomy (LF) and 3DF are compared.

Results From the 786 operations included (n=585), postoperative recurrence rates were significantly lower for the 3DF group (2/145, 1.4%) than the LF group (72/641, 11.2%) (P=0.001), and the time to recurrence was significantly longer (5.0±0 years vs. 4.0±0.2 years; P<0.0001). With recurrence excluded, there were no differences between the postoperative complication rates for 3DF (5/145, 3.5%) and LF (41/641, 6.4%) (P=0.4).

Conclusions Our results suggest that 3DF leads to lower recurrence rates and a longer disease-free period for patients, without increasing complications. 3DF provides a safe, efficacious, common ground surgical approach in the treatment of Dupuytren’s flexion deformity.

Keywords

Dupuytren contracture - Fascia - Recurrence - Hand - Fasciectomy

Publication History

Received: 08 December 2016

Accepted: 02 October 2018

Article published online:
03 April 2022

• REFERENCES

• 1 Dupuytren G. Permanent retraction of the fingers, produced by an affection of the palmar fascia. Lancet 1834; 2: 222-25
• 2 Cooper BA. A treatise on dislocations and fractures of the joints. Philadelphia: Blanchard and Lea; 1822
• 3 Black EM, Blazar PE. Dupuytren disease: an evolving understanding of an age-old disease. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2011; 19: 746-57
• 4 Dias JJ, Braybrooke J. Dupuytren’s contracture: an audit of the outcomes of surgery. J Hand Surg Br 2006; 31: 514-21
• 5 McIndoe A, Beare RL. The surgical management of Dupuytren’s contracture. Am J Surg 1958; 95: 197-203
• 6 Hueston JT. Limited fasciectomy for Dupuytren’s contracture. Plast Reconstr Surg Transplant Bull 1961; 27: 569-85
• 7 McGrouther DA. Dupuytren’s contracture. Green DP, Hotchkiss RN, Pederson WC. et al. Operative hand surgery. 4th ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1998: 563-91
• 8 Swartz WM, Lalonde DH. MOC-PS(SM) CME article: Dupuytren’s disease. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008. 121. 4 Suppl 1-10
• 9 Skoog T. Dupuytren’s contracture: pathogenesis and surgical treatment. Hueston JT, Tubiana R. Dupuytren’s disease. 2th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1985: 184-92
• 10 Shaw Jr RB, Chong AK, Zhang A. et al. Dupuytren’s disease: history, diagnosis, and treatment. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007; 120: 44e-54e
• 11 Denkler K. Surgical complications associated with fasciectomy for Dupuytren’s disease: a 20-year review of the English literature. Eplasty 2010; 10: e15
• 12 McFarlane RM, McGrouther DM. Complications and their management. McFarlane RM, McGrouther DA, Flint MH. Dupuytren’s disease: biology and treatment. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1990: 377-82
• 13 Crean SM, Gerber RA, Le Graverand MP. et al. The efficacy and safety of fasciectomy and fasciotomy for Dupuytren’s contracture in European patients: a structured review of published studies. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2011; 36: 396-407
• 14 Coert JH, Nerin JP, Meek MF. Results of partial fasciectomy for Dupuytren disease in 261 consecutive patients. Ann Plast Surg 2006; 57: 13-7
• 15 Bulstrode NW, Jemec B, Smith PJ. The complications of Dupuytren’s contracture surgery. J Hand Surg Am 2005; 30: 1021-5
• 16 McFarlane RM, Botz JS. The results of treatment. Mc-Farlane RM, McGrouther DA, Flint MH. Dupuytren’s disease: biology and treatment. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1990: 387-412
• 17 Kan HJ, Verrijp FW, Huisstede BM. et al. The consequences of different definitions for recurrence of Dupuytren’s disease. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013; 66: 95-103
• 18 Sennwald GR. Fasciectomy for treatment of Dupuytren’s disease and early complications. J Hand Surg Am 1990; 15: 755-61
• 19 Tonkin MA, Burke FD, Varian JP. Dupuytren’s contracture: a comparative study of fasciectomy and dermofasciectomy in one hundred patients. J Hand Surg Br 1984; 9: 156-62
• 20 Armstrong JR, Hurren JS, Logan AM. Dermofasciectomy in the management of Dupuytren’s disease. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2000; 82: 90-4
• 21 Balaguer T, David S, Ihrai T. et al. Histological staging and Dupuytren’s disease recurrence or extension after surgical treatment: a retrospective study of 124 patients. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2009; 34: 493-6
• 22 Hindocha S, Stanley JK, Watson S. et al. Dupuytren’s diathesis revisited: evaluation of prognostic indicators for risk of disease recurrence. J Hand Surg Am 2006; 31: 1626-34
• 23 Hueston JT. The table top test. Hand 1982; 14: 100-3
• 24 Fujino T. Contribution of the axial and perforator vasculature to circulation in flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 1967; 39: 125-37
• 25 McCash CR. The open palm technique in Dupuytren’s contracture. Br J Plast Surg 1964; 17: 271-80