A1 pulley cutting potential and safety of three ultrasound-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release techniques for trigger finger: a cadaveric study.
basic_science · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 40016848.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1186/s13018-025-05590-w and PMC identifier 11869403.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC-ND.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
There is no consensus as to the best technique for percutaneous trigger finger release. This assessor-blinded study compared three ultrasound-guided percutaneous trigger finger release techniques using a needle (N), a needle-knife (NK), and a specially designed knife (K). Three physicians simulated A1 pulley release surgery on 56 fingers of 14 fresh-frozen hand cadaver body donors. Both the physicians and the fingers included were randomly selected. The results of repeated-measures ANOVA revealed significantly longer cuts for the NK and K techniques, than for the N technique, both absolute (mean ± SD) (NK = 5.55 ± 3.07 mm, K = 6.29 ± 4.07 mm, and N = 2.02 ± 3.46 mm; N vs. NK p = 0.015, N vs. K p = 0.002, and NK vs. K p = 1.000), and cut percentage in relation to the total pulley length (NK = 51.61 ± 28.34%, K = 54.63 ± 33.72% and N = 18.24 ± 31.09%; N vs. NK p = 0.008, N vs. K p = 0.003, and NK vs. K p = 1.000). No neurovascular bundle injuries were found upon dissection. The overall complication rate was 11%, with no significant differences among the three techniques. Only one major tendon injury occurred in the NK group. In this cadaveric study, the NK and K techniques were more effective at releasing the A1 pulley than the N technique. All three techniques have emerged as equally safe.
Medical subject headings
- Trigger Finger Disorder
- Ultrasonography, Interventional
- Tendons