SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
The prevalence of atypical bilateral trigger thumb in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTrigger thumb is a common hand condition in children, and the necessity of observing a period before surgery is debated due to factors such as the metachronism of bilateral lesions, inconsistent severity, and rates of spontaneous resolution. The exact prevalence of bilateral lesions in these cases remains uncertain. Understanding these rates could help avoid unnecessary surgeries and reduce anesthetic exposure. This systematic review defines atypical bilateral trigger thumb as either metachronous or exhibiting inconsistent bilateral lesions. Its aim is to estimate the overall prevalence of atypical pediatric bilateral trigger thumb and determine the optimal observation duration to prevent unwarranted surgeries.
methodsThis study followed the PRISMA guidelines and registered in the PROSPERO. The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for all relevant studies up to August 2025. The Joanna Briggs Institute's quality assessment checklist was utilized to evaluate study quality. A random-effects meta-analysis was employed to synthesize prevalence rates from individual studies. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted to identify sources of heterogeneity and compare prevalence estimates.
resultsA total of five studies were included for the final analysis, with 1240 pediatric trigger thumbs. Our final meta-analysis showed that the pooled prevalence estimate of atypical pediatric bilateral trigger thumb was determined to be 5.9% (95% CI 2.7- 12.3). Significant heterogeneity was observed across the studies included in this analysis (I² = 85%; P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that the pooled prevalence of metachronisim and inconsistent degree was 3.4% (95% CI 2.5- 4.8, p < 0.001) and 10.7% (95% CI 3.1- 30.7, p = 0.002), respectively. Three studies reported the age at the first visit ranged from 20.1 to 31 months, while the period of metachronism spanned from 12 to 18 months.
conclusionOur study demonstrates that some cases of pediatric trigger thumb exhibit bilateral metachronism and varying degrees of severity, supporting a period of 12 to 18 months of observation before surgical intervention to minimize the risk of unnecessary or secondary procedures. Given the limited evidence in this systematic review and meta-analysis, it is imperative that future research includes rigorously designed, large-sample randomized controlled trials to strengthen the evidence base.
trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD42024562483).
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.