ArticleJournal of pain research2022
Modified Acupotomy versus Percutaneous Release for Trigger Thumb: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2022. 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.
- Comparison of Open and Percutaneous Treatment in Trigger Finger: A Retrospective Analysis of Functional Results and Cost-Effectiveness.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Ultrasound-guided microinvasive trigger thumb release with an 18-gauge blade-tipped needle: A case series.Medicine · 2025Article
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
Background: Acupotomy is now increasingly used for trigger thumb, while recent evidence showed it increased the risk of nerve injury. Based on the close proximity of the neurovascular bundles and the A1 pulley, we designed a modified acupotomy. Given that percutaneous release is the common surgical treatment, this retrospective study aimed to compare the effect and safety of modified acupotomy versus percutaneous release for trigger thumb. Methods: This is a retrospective study. All patients with trigger thumb were retrieved in the electronic records of the Department of Pain Medicine at the Beijing Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from January 2016 to September 2018. Both short-term (3 months) and long-term (2 years) outcomes were evaluated using the criteria established through Gilberts et al.'s questionnaire, including triggering, residual pain, stiffness, digital nerve injury, scar, infection and satisfaction. Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare differences between two groups. Results: A total of 305 patients with 334 trigger thumbs treated with either modified acupotomy (n = 194 thumbs) or percutaneous release (n = 140 thumbs) were included. Of them, 221 (72.5%) were female, and the mean age was 56.2 ± 10.0 years. The mean duration of trigger thumb lasted for 7.5 ± 3.6 months. At 3 months, all triggering were alleviated by both therapies. Although more digital nerve injury occurred in the percutaneous release (0 [0%] thumbs vs 5 [3.6%] thumbs, Conclusion: The modified acupotomy had better long-term outcomes and satisfaction than the percutaneous release for trigger thumb, although percutaneous release has less residual pain and better satisfaction in the short term. The modified acupotomy is a treatment option for trigger thumb.
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.