Download PDF
J Wrist Surg 2023; 12(06): 522-527
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1764301
Scientific Article

Clinical Outcomes of Trapeziometacarpal Arthrodesis with a Mean 3-Year Follow-up

Miguel Tovar-Bazaga 
1   Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology Surgery, Hand Surgery and Microsurgery Unit, IIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain
,
Aarón Martínez-Ulloa 
1   Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology Surgery, Hand Surgery and Microsurgery Unit, IIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain
,
Gonzalo Luengo-Alonso 
1   Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology Surgery, Hand Surgery and Microsurgery Unit, IIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain
,
Rubén Maestro-Carvajal
1   Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology Surgery, Hand Surgery and Microsurgery Unit, IIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain
,
Javier Cervera-Irimia
1   Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology Surgery, Hand Surgery and Microsurgery Unit, IIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain
› Author Affiliations Funding None declared.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background This paper's purpose was to analyze clinical results obtained with trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis and complications comparing different osteosynthesis systems.

Methods Thirty-seven trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis were performed in our center in a 7-year period, with a mean age of 52 years and 34 months of follow-up. The implants were distributed homogenously into three groups, using bone grafts in 12.5% of them.

Results A 75% achieved complete consolidation with a mean postsurgical Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of 2.4, Kapandji Opposition Score (KOS) of 8.1, lateral pinch strength of 12.1 kg, tripod pinch strength of 3.6 kg, and tip-to-tip strength of 1.5 kg. Consolidation was not achieved in nine patients, of which five were asymptomatic, three reoperated on trapeziectomy and tenosuspension, and one rearthrodesis. No statistical association was found between the implant used and pseudoarthrosis (p = 0.17), VAS (p = 0.06), or KOS (p = 0.45).

Conclusions Trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis reduces pain for well-chosen patients. Nonunion has low clinical significance in most cases and does not seem to depend on the use of allograft or the type of implant but on an appropriate surgical technique.

Keywords

trapeziometacarpal - arthrodesis - pseudoarthrosis - implant

Informed Consent

Verbal informed consent was obtained from all subjects for the study and further publication. Written informed consent was not obtained because the clinical evaluation of the absent variables in the clinical record was made nonpresential by telephone call. In case the patient requested written informed consent, we sent the attachment individually.


Trial Registration

Not applicable because no invasive procedure was performed.


Consent for Publication

The author grants the publisher the sole and exclusive license of the full copyright in the contribution, which license the publisher hereby accepts.


Authors' Contributions

All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.


Ethics Approval

Institutional review board approval under act 17/05/2021 was obtained prior to the commencement of the study by “Comité de Ética de la Investigación de la Fundación Jiménez Díaz.”




Publication History

Received: 19 October 2022

Accepted: 30 January 2023

Article published online:
05 April 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Haugen IK, Bøyesen P. Imaging modalities in hand osteoarthritis–and perspectives of conventional radiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasonography. Arthritis Res Ther 2011; 13 (06) 248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Burton RI, Pellegrini Jr VD. Surgical management of basal joint arthritis of the thumb. Part II. Ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition arthroplasty. J Hand Surg Am 1986; 11 (03) 324-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Eaton RG, Glickel SZ. Trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. Staging as a rationale for treatment. Hand Clin 1987; 3 (04) 455-471
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Berger AJ, Momeni A, Ladd AL. Intra- and interobserver reliability of the Eaton classification for trapeziometacarpal arthritis: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (04) 1155-1159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Ahern M, Skyllas J, Wajon A, Hush J. The effectiveness of physical therapies for patients with base of thumb osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2018; 35: 46-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Vermeulen GM, Slijper H, Feitz R, Hovius SE, Moojen TM, Selles RW. Surgical management of primary thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: a systematic review. J Hand Surg Am 2011; 36 (01) 157-169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gay AM, Cerlier A, Iniesta A, Legré R. Surgery for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. Hand Surg Rehabil 2016; 35 (04) 238-249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wilkens SC, Meghpara MM, Ring D, Coert JH, Jupiter JB, Chen NC. Trapeziometacarpal arthrosis. JBJS Rev 2019; 7 (01) e8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Wajon A, Vinycomb T, Carr E, Edmunds I, Ada L. Surgery for thumb (trapeziometacarpal joint) osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 2015 (02) CD004631
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rizzo M, Moran SL, Shin AY. Long-term outcomes of trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis in the management of trapeziometacarpal arthritis. J Hand Surg Am 2009; 34 (01) 20-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kenniston JA, Bozentka DJ. Treatment of advanced carpometacarpal joint disease: arthrodesis. Hand Clin 2008; 24 (03) 285-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Singh HP, Hoare C, Beresford-Cleary N, Anakwe R, Hayton M. Nonunion after trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis: comparison between K-wire and internal fixation. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2015; 40 (04) 351-355
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Fulton DB, Stern PJ. Trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis in primary osteoarthritis: a minimum two-year follow-up study. J Hand Surg Am 2001; 26 (01) 109-114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Smeraglia F, Soldati A, Orabona G, Ivone A, Balato G, Pacelli M. Trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis: is bone union necessary for a good outcome?. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2015; 40 (04) 356-361
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wilkens SC, Menendez ME, Ring D, Chen N. QuickDASH score is associated with treatment choice in patients with trapeziometacarpal arthrosis. Hand (N Y) 2017; 12 (05) 461-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Tang JB, Giddins G. Why and how to report surgeons' levels of expertise. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2016; 41 (04) 365-366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Swigart CR, Eaton RG, Glickel SZ, Johnson C. Splinting in the treatment of arthritis of the first carpometacarpal joint. J Hand Surg Am 1999; 24 (01) 86-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Day CS, Gelberman R, Patel AA, Vogt MT, Ditsios K, Boyer MI. Basal joint osteoarthritis of the thumb: a prospective trial of steroid injection and splinting. J Hand Surg Am 2004; 29 (02) 247-251
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hippensteel KJ, Calfee R, Dardas AZ, Gelberman R, Osei D, Wall L. Functional outcomes of thumb trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis with a locked plate versus ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition. J Hand Surg Am 2017; 42 (09) 685-692
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Forseth MJ, Stern PJ. Complications of trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis using plate and screw fixation. J Hand Surg Am 2003; 28 (02) 342-345
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 De Smet L, Vaes F, Van Den Broecke J. Arthrodesis of the trapeziometacarpal joint for basal joint osteoarthritis of the thumb: the importance of obtaining osseous union. Chir Main 2005; 24 (05) 222-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Hattori Y, Doi K, Dormitorio B, Sakamoto S. Arthrodesis for primary osteoarthritis of the trapeziometacarpal joint in elderly patients. J Hand Surg Am 2016; 41 (07) 753-759
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar