ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2017
Comparative Effectiveness of Needle Aponeurotomy and Collagenase Injection for Dupuytren's Contracture: A Multicenter Study.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous Needle Fasciotomy versus Collagenase Injection for Dupuytren's Contracture: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies.Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2021Article
- Investigating the effects of Pirfenidone on TGF-β1 stimulated non-SMAD signaling pathways in Dupuytren's disease -derived fibroblasts.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the efficacy of collagenase clostridium histolyticum (CCH) injections has been demonstrated by randomized clinical trials, the relative effectiveness of CCH remains uncertain. Our aim was to compare the outcomes of CCH with those of percutaneous needle aponeurotomy (PNA) in daily clinical practice.
methodsWe analyzed data from patients undergoing PNA or CCH between 2011 and 2014 at 7 practice sites in the Netherlands. We examined the degree of improvement in contracture and adverse effects at 6-12 weeks after surgery or the last injection. Additionally, we invited patients to complete the Michigan Hand Questionnaire before and at 6-12 months follow-up. To minimize the risk of bias, we used propensity score matching.
resultsAmong 130 matched patients (93% Tubiana I or II) undergoing PNA (n = 46) and CCH (n = 84), improvement in contracture was similar: 26 degrees (65% improvement from baseline) for PNA versus 31 degrees (71%) for CCH for affected metacarpophalangeal joints (
conclusionsIn patients with mild contractures (Tubiana I or II), CCH was as effective as PNA in reducing contractures. Both treatments were safe and improved hand function to a similar extent in daily practice.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.