ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2023
Complications Following Endoscopic and Open Trigger Finger Release: A Retrospective Comparative Study.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of Postsurgical Outcomes in Trigger Finger Release: A Retrospective Analysis.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
- Single-Portal Antegrade Endoscopic Trigger Finger Release: Cadaveric and Clinical Outcomes.Hand (New York, N.Y.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOpen trigger finger release (OTFR) and endoscopic trigger finger release (ETFR) are effective methods in treating stenosing tenosynovitis. However, a paucity of literature exists comparing the techniques. This study describes and compares postoperative complications following OTFR and ETFR at a single institution.
methodsPatients undergoing trigger finger release between 2018 and 2020 within a single institution were identified. Electronic medical records were reviewed for patient demographics, surgical history, surgical characteristics, and clinical outcomes. Major and minor postoperative complications were assessed. Secondary outcome measures included tourniquet time and procedure time. Statistical analysis evaluated associations between postoperative complications, surgical technique, patient demographics, and surgical characteristics.
resultsIn total, 57 patients (80 digits) were included in the study: 42 digits treated with OTFR and 38 digits treated with ETFR. Mean follow-up time was 57.6 ± 69.0 days (range, 7-307 days) for ETFR and 34.2 ± 26.3 days (range, 6-120 days) for OTFR. Overall, major, and minor complication rates for the cohort were 8.8%, 1.8% and 7.0%, respectively. There were no major complications following ETFR and 1 following OTFR (4%), the isolated case being postoperative Chronic regional pain syndrome. Minor complication rates were similar following OTFR (8%) and ETFR (6%). Persistent digit stiffness and swelling were found to be the most prevalent minor complications (n = 2, respectively), followed by wound dehiscence (n = 1). Female patients were significantly more likely to experience postoperative complications.
conclusionsMajor complications following trigger finger release are unlikely; however, minor complications are prominent. Patients treated with OTFR and ETFR showed similar postoperative complication rates. Continued investigations into the benefits of ETFR are warranted.
Indexed as
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.