Skip to content

Comparison Between 2 Treatment Modalities of Trigger Finger: Ultrasound-guided Percutaneous Release of A1 Pulley by a Needle Knife Versus Ultrasound-guided Corticosteroid Injection in the Treatment of Trigger Finger

Ultrasound-guided Percutaneous Release of A1 Pulley by a Needle Knife Versus Ultrasound-guided Corticosteroid Injection in the Treatment of Trigger Finger: a Randomized Clinical Trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT06785935
Enrollment
40
Registered
2025-01-21
Start date
2024-11-11
Completion date
2025-12-31
Last updated
2025-01-21

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Trigger Finger

Brief summary

Trigger finger is a common cause of hand disability and pain in the general population. It is a pathologic condition of the digital pulleys and flexor tendons. Although the pathogenesis is incompletely clear and multifactorial, the most common cause of the trigger finger is the thickened flexor tendon and/or thickened first annular (A1) pulley located at the metacarpophalangeal joint. Currently, ultrasound is considered an effective and valuable tool for assessing the trigger finger, providing static and dynamic evaluations of this condition and a comparison with the adjacent normal digits. Recently, it has been reported that ultrasound-guided percutaneous A1 pulley precise release using a needle knife has received increasing attention in the clinical treatment of trigger fingers and achieved good results. To our knowledge, this is the first clinical study comparing the efficacy and safety of ultrasonic-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release with a needle knife and the ultrasonic-guided steroid injection in treating trigger fingers.

Interventions

ultrasonography-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release using a needle knife

ultrasonography-guided corticosteroid injection under the A1 pulley

Sponsors

Mansoura University Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Idiopathic trigger finger * Trigger finger at the level of A1 pulley * Trigger finger of Green's grades II or III

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with secondary causes of trigger fingers like diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis, gout, hypothyroidism, amyloidosis, and sarcoidosis. * Patients with a previous history of first annular pulley release or injection. * Patients with trigger fingers of Green's grade I and IV. * Patients with trigger fingers at any level other than the A1 pulley.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Pain intensity using the visual analog scale (VAS) scoring systemBefore the procedure as well as after one week, one month, and three months
Functional ability according to the standard quick disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand score (Q DASH) questionnaireBefore the procedure as well as after one week, one month, and three months
Recurrence: The grade of trigger finger according to Green's classificationBefore the procedure as well as after one week, one month, and three months
Complications such as inflammation, infection, scarring, wound healing problems, and sensory changesAfter one week of the procedure

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026