Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Clinical outcomes after open trigger finger release are excellent. Minimally invasive techiques with ultrasound guidance theoretically offer advantages for faster recovery but this technique has not been compared prospectively with the standard of care (open trigger release). This study aims to prospectively analyze patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing open vs. ultrasound-guided trigger finger release.
Trigger finger is initially treated conservatively. Conservative treatment options include modification of activities, painkiller administration, splinting, and corticosteroid injections (1). Open or minimally invasive surgical treatment can be considered if conservative treatment fails. Minimally invasive surgery options consist of ultrasound-guided or blind percutaneous trigger finger release.
Many studies have reported good clinical outcomes after ultrasound-guided trigger finger release, including low rates of catching or locking recurrence rates, high QuickDASH scores and high patient satisfaction (2-4).
Postoperative clinical outcomes of open surgery have been widely compared to percutaneous surgery (5-8). However, the comparison of postoperative results between ultrasound-guided and open trigger finger release has been scarcely reported. Nikolaou et al. reported that ultrasound-guided trigger finger release resulted in a significantly sooner return to normal activities and better patient-reported cosmetic outcomes than open trigger finger release (9). Success rates and mean QuickDASH scores did not differ significantly between these groups in this cohort.
The potential benefits of ultrasound-guided trigger finger release compared to open trigger finger release have yet to be investigated. This study aims to prospectively analyze patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing open vs. ultrasound-guided trigger finger release.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Open Release | Patients who underwent open trigger finger release | ||
| Ultrasound-Guided Release | Patients who underwent ultrasound-guided trigger finger release |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| UltraGuideTFR (Sonex Health, MN, USA) | Device | SonexHealth percutaneous trigger finger release device used in ultrasound-guided release cohort |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Activities of Daily Living (Study-specific questionnaire) | Study-specific survey of limitations with Activities of Daily Living. Responses for questions on the study-specific survey for limitations with ADLS utilized a Likert scale with 1 representing no difficulty with the task and 5 being unable to perform the task due to limitations from trigger finger symptoms. Likert scale responses for the 12 ADLs on the survey were summated for final scores ranging from 14 (no difficulty with any ADLs) to 70 (unable to perform any ADLs). These were standardized to a 100-point scale to facilitate clinical interpretation of outcomes. A score of 0 represented no functional limitations with ADLs and a score of 100 represented inability to perform any ADL on the survey. | From enrollment to final follow-up at 6 months |
| Pain on the Visual Analogue Scale | VAS pain score on a scale from 1 to 10 with a score of 1 representating no pain and score or 10 representing maximal pain. | From enrollment to final follow-up at 6 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Timing of Return to work | Timing of return to work in days as reported by patient. Minimum value is 0 days, meaning patient reported returning to work on the day of the procedure. No maximum value applicable. | From 2 days post-procedure to final follow-up at 6 months |
| Patient satisfaction with procedure |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) flexion | Proximal interphalangeal (PIP) flexion measured with a goniometer and recorded in degrees. Minimum and maximum values within physiologic range of motion for the PIPJ. | Assessments at the preoperative and two-week follow-up visits |
| PIPJ motion as evaluated by distance from fingertip to distal palmar crease in composite flexion |
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
patients undergoing trigger finger release for the index through small fingers was conducted from June 2023 through June 2024 at two tertiary care academic medical centers in an integrated health network
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Rohit Garg, MBBS | Massachusetts General Hospital | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brigham and Women's Hospital | Boston | Massachusetts | 02114 | United States | ||
| Massachusetts General Hospital |
Anonymized patient data can be shared upon reasonable request for transparency
January 2023 through January 2027
De-identified IPD will be available to qualified researchers who submit a methodologically sound proposal. Requests may be made to the principal investigator. Access will be provided through a secure data-sharing platform following execution of a data use agreement
Not provided
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP_ICF | Yes | Yes | Yes | Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, and Informed Consent Form | Jun 6, 2023 | Dec 11, 2025 | Prot_SAP_ICF_000.pdf |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D052582 | Trigger Finger Disorder |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D053682 | Tendon Entrapment |
| D052256 | Tendinopathy |
| D009135 | Muscular Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Patient reported satisfaction with procedure. Response of either yes or no to the following question: Are you satisfied with the procedure, and would you choose to have it again for a similar problem? |
| Single evaluation at final follow-up 6 months post-procedure |
Distance in millimeters from fingertip to the distal palmar crease (DPC) in composite flexion. Minimum of 0 cm, maximum value of >5 cm which represents absence of functionally meaningful finger flexion. |
| Assessments at the preoperative and two-week follow-up visits |
| PIPJ flexion contracture (if present) | If present, PIPJ flexion contracture measured using a goniometer and recorded in degrees. Minimum value of 0 degrees representing absence of flexion contracture, maximum value within physiologic range of motion for the PIPJ. | Assessments at the preoperative and two-week follow-up visits |
| Analegesia requirement | Pain medication requirement including acetaminophen, anti-inflammatories, and/or narcotics. Open response from patients for the following question: How many oxycodone or other narcotic medications are you taking post-op? | From enrollment to final follow-up at 6 months |
| Grip Strength | Grip strength was evaluated using a Jamar dynamometer setting #2. | Assessments at the preoperative and two week follow-up visits |
| Boston |
| Massachusetts |
| 02114 |
| United States |