Acta ortopedica mexicana · 2019
[Evaluation of postoperative results short and long term of percutaneous liberation vs open technique for trigger finger].
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Carrasco-Ortiz O, Pérez-Garmendia R, Márquez-Espriella C, Arce-Salinas C A, Dávila-Díaz R, Topete-González A O, Garzón-Muvdi J, Espino-Gaucín J I
Аннотация
INDRODUCTION: Trigger finger is very common in the population, with a life-threatening risk of developing the disease of 2.6% in the general population and increasing to 4 to 10% in diabetics. Since there is no standard gold of surgical treatment and there is still controversy in this, it is important to evaluate the results of the different surgical techniques. The objective of this study is to evaluate postoperative results of both surgical techniques in patients with follow-up of 1 to 12 months postoperative.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: It is a prospective, longitudinal, descriptive and observational study carried out in a period from January 2015 to December 2017. Postoperative open (group 1) and percutaneous needle (group 2) patients were included. All patients were reviewed and surveyed by telephone. The comparison results of both techniques were analyzed using 2 for parametric results and by the Fisher test for nonparametric results.
RESULTS: It was found that patients in group 2 expressed greater satisfaction, where 21.8% (n = 12) were fully satisfied with the percutaneous procedure, unlike those in group 1 where total satisfaction was only manifested at 3.8% (n = 2).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study we can conclude that both techniques are effective for the treatment of trigger finger, with percutaneous needle release offering the highest degree of satisfaction in patients.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: It is a prospective, longitudinal, descriptive and observational study carried out in a period from January 2015 to December 2017. Postoperative open (group 1) and percutaneous needle (group 2) patients were included. All patients were reviewed and surveyed by telephone. The comparison results of both techniques were analyzed using 2 for parametric results and by the Fisher test for nonparametric results.
RESULTS: It was found that patients in group 2 expressed greater satisfaction, where 21.8% (n = 12) were fully satisfied with the percutaneous procedure, unlike those in group 1 where total satisfaction was only manifested at 3.8% (n = 2).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study we can conclude that both techniques are effective for the treatment of trigger finger, with percutaneous needle release offering the highest degree of satisfaction in patients.