Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare patients who underwent open or percutaneous trigger finger release in terms of clinical outcomes, time to return to activities, and recurrence. The records of patients who underwent percutaneous and open trigger finger release between 2012 and 2018 at two different hospitals in the same city were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups: 33 patients who underwent percutaneous trigger finger release (Group PR) and 48 patients who underwent open release of A1 pulley (Group OR). The clinical classification of cases was done according to the Quinnell classification. The functional outcomes of the patients were evaluated according to the Quick DASH scale. The mean age of the patients was 55.95 ± 11.73 (27–82) years; 71.6% (n = 58) were female. The left side was involved in 56.8% (n = 46) patients, and 81 patients underwent percutaneous or open trigger finger release with a mean follow-up duration of 37.40 ± 16.22 (12–72) months. The time to start daily activities was shorter in Group PR than in Group OR, and the difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). A comparison of the upper extremity functional scores between the two groups revealed no statistically significant difference (PR; 15.21 ± 6.17, PO; 12.99 ± 6.89, p = 0.142). Although the rate of complications was higher in Group OR, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (PR; 12.12%, PO: 20.83%, p = 0.217). Percutaneous trigger finger release can be preferred in adult trigger finger surgery due to increased risks regarding wound healing and infections associated with advanced age, presence of diabetes and inflammatory arthritis, and the expectation of rapid return to daily activities.

Key words: Trigger finger, percutaneous release, open release