ReviewCureus2025
Joint Replacement Versus Trapeziectomy for Trapeziometacarpal Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Trapeziometacarpal (TMC) osteoarthritis is a common and disabling condition affecting hand function and quality of life. When conservative management fails, surgical intervention is warranted. The two primary surgical options are trapeziectomy, often combined with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), and total joint arthroplasty using prosthetic implants. The objective of our study is to compare the efficacy, functional outcomes, patient satisfaction, and complication profiles of trapeziectomy versus joint replacement for TMC osteoarthritis. This review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines and specifically evaluates outcomes associated with the MAÏA™ (Groupe Lépine, France) and Touch® (KERIMEDICAL, Switzerland) prostheses compared to various trapeziectomy techniques. 11 studies, including retrospective and prospective cohort studies, a randomised controlled trial, and a same-patient comparison study, were analysed. Outcomes assessed included pain relief, grip and pinch strength, range of motion (ROM), patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), recovery time, and complication rates. Both procedures effectively relieve pain and improve function. Joint replacement demonstrated superior short-term functional outcomes and faster recovery, particularly in strength restoration. However, it was associated with implant-specific complications. Trapeziectomy, while slower in recovery, showed consistent long-term efficacy and fewer implant-related issues. Both surgical options are viable. The choice should be individualised based on patient goals, anatomical considerations, and the balance between rapid functional recovery and implant-related risks.
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.