Orthonotes
Orthonotes
by the.bonestories
v3.0 Fusion
v3.0 Fusion
PubMed Original Article Evidence Unclassified

Development of an In Vitro Swan Neck Deformity Biomechanical Model.

Hand (New York, N.Y.) | 2022 | Haddara MM, Fan S, Matache BA, Chinchalkar SJ

In-App Reader

Open Source

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

Source
PubMed
Type
Original Article
Evidence
Unclassified

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] Conflict of interest statement: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 11. J Hand Surg Asian Pac Vol. 2017 Sep;22(3):267-274. doi: 10.1142/S0218810417300030. Volar Tenodesis for the Treatment of Swan-neck Deformity; A Systematic Review. Kiziridis G(1), Giddins GEB(2). Author information: (1)* Department of Trauma & Orthopaedics, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK. (2)† Department of Trauma & Orthopaedics, Royal United Hospital, Bath, UK. BACKGROUND: Swan-neck deformity is a common problem particularly in patients with Rheumatoid arthritis. Mobile swan-neck deformities (Nalebuff types I,II) can be treated non-operatively and operatively. In this paper we report on a systematic review of the treatment of swan-neck deformities with volar tenodesis. METHODS: We performed a literature search and analysed the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Only eight papers were eligible. None was of high quality. The data reporting was very variable. Therefore, no meta-analysis could be performed, but only a descriptive analysis. RESULTS: The techniques work in preventing proximal inter-phalangeal joint hyperextension between 60 and 100% in these studies. There appears to be some recurrence of hyper-extension with time so that papers with longer follow-up tend to have poorer results. CONCLUSIONS: There is no good evidence that one technique is superior to another. The choice of technique is likely to remain based on surgeon preference for the foreseeable future. Future studies should be at least comparative and preferably part of a trial. DOI: 10.1142/S0218810417300030

Linked Wiki Topics

This article has not been linked to a wiki topic yet.

Linked Cases

This article has not been linked to a case yet.

Linked Atlases

This article has not been linked to an atlas yet.