Mallet Finger
Conditions
Brief summary
This is a single center prospective study comparing the extension pin block vs pin orthosis-extension block pinning for bonny mallet fractures.
Detailed description
Mallet finger is a fracture of the distal phalanx involving the dorsal articular surface. It is important because it concerns the extensor tendon attachment site. The clinical manifestation of mallet finger formation is active extension loss at the DIP joint. If the injury is not treated and becomes chronic, the DIP passive extension is gradually lost and a hyperextension posture occurs in the PIP joint due to the compensatory swan neck deformity. Non-surgical methods have an important place in the treatment of mallet finger injuries. The indications for surgical treatment of mallet finger injuries are a matter of debate. Conditions that are widely accepted as definite surgical indications are open injury, individuals who cannot work with a splint, the ruptured dorsal part is large and includes more than 30% of the articular surface, and the presence of palmar subluxation in the DIP. Among the mallet finger surgical treatments, the extension pin block technique , bracing in extension, hook method are defined. In this prospective study, we aimed to compare the extension pin block technique with the pin orthosis-extension block pinning. In comparison, the patients eligible for the study will be evaluated according to Crawford criteria for function evaluation, complications (infection, nail deformities, skin necrosis, DIP joint osteoarthritis), recovery time.
Interventions
PROCEDUREcextension pin block
this is the technique for mallet finger where 2 pins are used, one for the extension block and other intramedullary for the extension posture
PROCEDUREpin orthosis- extension block pin
this is the technique for mallet finger where only 1 pin is used for extension block and an orthosis is applied for the extension posture
Sponsors
Ankara University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* 18 years and older patients * Wehbe classification type 2 b (Type Definition) I No DIP joint subluxation II DIP joint subluxation III Epiphyseal and physeal injuries Subtype A Avulsed fragment \<1/3 of articular surface B Avulsed fragment 1/3-2/3 of articular surface C Avulsed fragment \>2/3 of articular surface ) * Isolated bonny mallet fractures * Minimum 1 year follow up * Good cognitive status
Exclusion criteria
* Patients under the age of 18 * Open fracture * Chronic mallet finger * TFracture area that includes more than 50% of the joint face * Patients whose follow-up less than 1 year
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Crawford criteria | postoperative 1st day | functional scoring for the DIP joint, focuses on range of motion and pain |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| complications | postoperative 1st day | skin necrosis, loss of range of motion, infection, nail bed injury |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Contacts
Primary ContactMalik Kısmet, MD
Backup ContactYener Yoğun, MD
Outcome results
None listed