Injuries of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint of the Fingers

Benke, G.; Stableforth, P.G.

doi:10.1016/s0072-968x(79)80048-0

Cited by 29 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there is no clear consensus on the treatment of injuries of the collateral ligament of the PIP joint (3,9). An injured ligament with instability greater than 20°or with no end point on manual stress is considered to be a complete rupture (9,15).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary Repair of the Collateral Ligament of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Using a Suture Anchor

Kato

Nemoto

Nakajima

et al. 2003

Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ten out of 12 complete ruptures of the collateral ligament of the proximal interphalangeal joint were repaired primarily using a suture anchor. Active finger exercise was started gently by taping the injured finger to adjacent one one week postoperatively. All patients returned to their original occupation or sports activities within seven weeks of operation. No patients complained of pain on the involved finger at rest or during movement. There was no instability of the proximal interphalangeal joint on manual lateral stress test postoperatively.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary Repair of the Collateral Ligament of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Using a Suture Anchor

Kato

Nemoto

Nakajima

et al. 2003

Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Der resultierende Verlust von Kollagen kann somit zur Entwicklung einer Beugekontraktur führen [8][9][10][11]. In der Literatur wird vor allem die Beugekontraktur als komplizierende Langzeitfolge beschrieben und scheint die größte therapeutische Herausforderung zu sein [5,8,12,13]. Wenn sich andererseits die rupturierten Stumpfenden der palmaren Platte nicht adaptieren, geht man davon aus, dass sie in Überlänge vernarben und so zu einer palmaren Instabilität resp.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Frühfunktionelles Management bei Hyperextensionstraumata des proximalen Interphalangealgelenkes mit Läsion der palmaren Platte: Extensionsblock versus Achterschlaufe

Lunger

Bach

et al. 2017

Handchir Mikrochir plast Chir

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Volar plate disruption of the proximal interphalangeal joint (PIP) is a common hand injury following finger hyperextension. At our institution, patients presenting with disruptions of the palmar plate (Eaton and Littler types I and II) before 2011 were treated with extension block splinting (group A). Since 2011, all patients with Eaton and Littler types I and II have received buddy taping (group B). The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the respective treatment outcomes. In this retrospective study, we analysed the data of 44 patients visiting our department with volar plate disruption (Eaton and Littler types I and II) from 2009 to 2012. In group A, 23 patients were treated with custom-made extension block splinting in 10 ° flexion, compared with 21 patients treated with buddy taping in group B. Both groups received dorsal night splinting in 10 ° flexion. No statistically significant differences between the two groups were found in regard to treatment duration (p = 0,981), amount of required treatment sessions (p = 0,271), total active motion (TAM) (p = 0,693) and extension deficit (p = 0,404) in the PIP joint at the end of treatment, time until hand therapy was started (p = 0,285) or the Eaton und Littler diagnosis (p = 0,241). In the extension block group (group A), 10 out of 23 (44 %) patients after a median of 9 (4-10) weeks of treatment had an excellent result, 11 (48 %) had a good result, and 2 (8 %) patients had a poor result with a median 90 ° (85-100 °) TAM in the PIP joint and no extension deficit. In group A, all patients received a median of 4 (3-6) treatment sessions. Of those treated with buddy taping (group B), 14 out of 21 (66 %) patients at a median of 6 (4-13) weeks had an excellent result, 6 (29 %) had a good result, and 1 (5 %) patient had a poor result with a median TAM of 95 ° (82,5-100 °) and no extension deficit. In this group, patients received a total of 4 (3-5) treatment sessions. The type of treatment had no significant influence on the Benke and Stableforth outcome (χ2 = 2,385, df = 3, p = 0,304). No patient developed palmar joint instability. No treatment option proved to be superior. We consider buddy taping to be faster, easier and more flexible to use.

show abstract

“…Benke and Stapleforth in a retrospective review of 96 PIP joint injuries found a poor outcome in 30 % (almost half of which had open injuries), as characterized by pain, poor function, joint instability, or stiffness in the form of fl exion deformities [ 29 ].…”

Section: The Proximal Interphalangeal Joint: (Pipj) Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%