ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Reliability and Anatomical Agreement of High-Resolution Ultrasound for Measuring the Length and Thickness of the A1 Pulley: A Cadaveric Study.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate assessment of the A1 pulley is essential for the diagnosis and treatment of trigger finger, particularly in ultrasound-guided percutaneous release. Although high-resolution ultrasound is widely used to evaluate pulley morphology, the validity of sonographic measurements of A1 pulley length has not been clearly established against anatomical reference standard. This study evaluated the reliability and validity of ultrasound for measuring A1 pulley length and thickness in human cadavers and assessed the reproducibility of A2 pulley length. Twenty fingers from five fresh-frozen cadaveric hands were examined. Two blinded expert musculoskeletal sonographers independently performed ultrasound acquisition and measurements of A1 and A2 pulley length and A1 pulley thickness, while a third blinded observer obtained anatomical measurements after meticulous dissection using a digital caliper. Ultrasound systematically overestimated A1 pulley length compared with anatomical measurements and showed very poor reliability (ICC = 0.05) with wide limits of agreement. In contrast, A2 pulley length showed high interobserver reliability (ICC = 0.83) and relatively better agreement with anatomical values, whereas A1 pulley thickness showed moderate reproducibility (ICC = 0.61). Overall, A1 length measurements showed substantial variability and limited agreement, while A2 length and A1 thickness appeared more consistent within this experimental setting. These findings should be interpreted within the limitations of a cadaveric model.
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.