2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2015.11.026
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Factors Related to Distal Interphalangeal Joint Extension Loss After Extension Block Pinning of Mallet Finger Fractures

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, we believe that the old bony mallet finger usually needs to be accurately reduced by open reduction, and removed callus and fibrous tissue of the fracture end and restored fresh bone interface so as to facilitate the fracture healing. Despite the availability of a wide selection of ORIF methods, they often produce inconsistent results in different patients and sometimes even lead to severe complications or aggravation of symptoms [19,20]. The size of the fracture block at the base of the distal phalanx of the patients included in this study was more than one third of the joint surface of the distal phalanx.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, we believe that the old bony mallet finger usually needs to be accurately reduced by open reduction, and removed callus and fibrous tissue of the fracture end and restored fresh bone interface so as to facilitate the fracture healing. Despite the availability of a wide selection of ORIF methods, they often produce inconsistent results in different patients and sometimes even lead to severe complications or aggravation of symptoms [19,20]. The size of the fracture block at the base of the distal phalanx of the patients included in this study was more than one third of the joint surface of the distal phalanx.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Lee et al [26] have shown that anatomical reduction can be achieved with the use of two extension block K-wires. Kim et al [27] have performed two extension block pinning in 31 mallet fingers, all of which achieved anatomical reduction with a < 1 mm step-off. However, 12 patients presented with a ≥ 10 extension loss.…”
Section: Group a † (N = 34) Group B ‡ (N = 35) P Valuementioning
confidence: 99%