Silicone Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty for Primary Osteoarthritis Using a Volar Approach

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (6) ◽  
pp. 1075-1081 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio R. Proubasta ◽  
Claudia G. Lamas ◽  
Luis Natera ◽  
Angelica Millan
Keyword(s):  
Proximal Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Volar Approach ◽  
Primary Osteoarthritis

Comparison of outcomes of three surgical approaches for proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty using a surface-replacing implant

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 608-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elvira Bodmer ◽  
Miriam Marks ◽  
Stefanie Hensler ◽  
Stephan Schindele ◽  
Daniel B. Herren
Keyword(s):  
Proximal Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Joint Motion ◽  
Extension Deficit ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Volar Approach ◽  
The Mean

The objective was to compare outcomes of the volar, Chamay and tendon splitting approaches for proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty using a surface-replacing implant (CapFlex-PIP). One-hundred prospectively documented patients with a 2-year follow-up were included. Range of proximal interphalangeal joint motion, the brief Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire and complications were analysed. Between baseline and follow-up, mean proximal interphalangeal joint motion increased for the volar (53° to 54°), Chamay (38° to 53°) and tendon splitting (40° to 61°) approaches. The volar approach yielded the greatest flexion and the highest extension deficit. The mean brief Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire scores at baseline and 2 years were 45 and 74 (volar), 45 and 66 (Chamay) and 41 and 75 (tendon splitting). Seven patients in the Chamay group and two in the volar group required a reoperation consisting of teno-/arthrolysis. The tendon splitting approach tended to result in the best outcomes that were associated with fewer complications compared with the volar and Chamay approaches. Level of evidence: IV

Pyrocarbon versus Silicone Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty

2013 ◽  
Vol 131 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Chan ◽  
Olubimpe Ayeni ◽  
Leslie McKnight ◽  
Teegan A. Ignacy ◽  
Forough Farrokhyar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proximal Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Interphalangeal Joint

Proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty with silicone implants (NeuFlex) by a lateral approach: a series of 51 cases

2011 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Merle ◽  
F. Villani ◽  
B. Lallemand ◽  
L. Vaienti
Keyword(s):  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Proximal Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Silicone Implants ◽  
Lateral Stability ◽  
Degenerative Osteoarthritis ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Quick Dash

The aim of this study is to assess outcomes of a lateral surgical approach for proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty with NeuFlex® silicone implants for primary degenerative osteoarthritis. We reviewed 51 arthroplasties performed on 43 patients. The mean follow up period was 36 months (range 18–42). The average preoperative range of motion (ROM) was 38°. The average postoperative ROM was 63°. In 21/51 (41%) cases, there was an average axial deviation of 17° (range 10–30°). VAS and Quick DASH scores improved. In 5/51 (10%) cases, further surgery was required. Our lateral approach seems to be effective and minimally invasive, providing adequate exposure. Contralateral incision and contralateral ligament reinforcement should be performed, whenever necessary, to improve lateral stability.

scholarly journals Surface Replacement Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty: A Case Series

Hand ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 669-674
Author(s):  
Pieter W. Jordaan ◽  
Duncan McGuire ◽  
Michael W. Solomons
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Retrospective Review ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Proximal Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Interphalangeal Joint ◽  
Surface Replacement ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: In 2012, our unit published our experience with a pyrocarbon proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) implant. Due to high subsidence rates, a decision was made to change to a cemented surface replacement proximal interphalangeal joint (SR-PIPJ) implant. The purpose of this study was to assess whether the change to a cemented implant would improve the subsidence rates. Methods: Retrospective review of all patients who had a cemented SR-PIPJ arthroplasty performed from 2011 to 2013 with at least 12 months follow-up. Results: A total of 43 joints were included with an average follow-up of 26.5 months. There was a significant ( P = .02) improvement in arc of motion with an average satisfaction score of 3.3 (satisfied patient). Subsidence was noted in 26% of joints with a significant difference in range of motion ( P = .003) and patient satisfaction ( P = .001) between the group with and without subsidence. Conclusions: The change to a cemented implant resulted in satisfied patients with an improvement in range of motion. The rate of subsidence improved but remains unacceptably high.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document