[Skier's thumb].

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] 18. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2024 May;49(5):534-545. doi: 10.1177/17531934241235556. Epub 2024 Mar 15. Clinical outcomes after primary repair for thumb ulnar collateral ligament ruptures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Legerstee IWF(1)(2), Derksen BM(1), van der Oest MJW(1), Hundepool CA(1), Duraku LS(3), Selles RW(1)(4), Michiel Zuidam J(1). Author information: (1)Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. (2)Hand and Arm Service, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. (3)Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. (4)Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. There is no consensus on the best surgical technique for treating thumb ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) ruptures. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates which primary repair technique and postoperative immobilization protocol result in the best clinical outcomes. A literature search was conducted in Embase, Medline ALL Ovid, Web of Science Core Selection and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Pain, stability, tip pinch strength, key pinch strength, grip strength, return to work and metacarpophalangeal joint range of motion were collected as postoperative outcomes. In total, 29 studies were included. All surgical techniques resulted in satisfactory clinical outcomes, with no significant differences between bone anchor reinsertion, suture fixation, K-wire fixation and a combination of techniques. K-wire immobilization resulted in worse postoperative pain, but similar stability compared to immobilization without a K-wire. Clinical outcomes after thumb UCL repair are excellent, with no differences in clinical outcomes noted among surgical techniques. DOI: 10.1177/17531934241235556