Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty Research Articles

The long-term results of proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty of the hand

Introduction Small joints replacement is a valid treatment for deforming osteoarthritis and traumatic injuries to the phalangeal joints of the hand to restore motor hand functions. Various types of implants differing in shape, biomechanics and material composition have been developed.The purpose of the study was to evaluate long-term results of the proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty of the hand using various implants and identify their advantages.Material and methods We retrospectively reviewed 78 cases of proximal interphalangeal joint replacement in 64 patients. Outcomes were assessed at 6 months and at follow-up stages with preoperative and postoperative measurements of the range of motion in the joint evaluating pain, radiographs and outcomes measures using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.Results The range of motion in the prosthetic joint increased significantly at different follow-up periods with all types of implants. The pain syndrome decreased. Radiographs revealed 10 cases of aseptic instability in the group of constrained prostheses. The DASH assessment showed high subjective satisfaction with the treatment.Discussion We could not find papers reporting PIP joint arthroplasty using SBI D.G.T. implant system. A retrospective study of RM Finger arthroplasty of the PIP joint indicated restored joint stability with AROM improvement and with low pain, although it had a high rate of complications. We recorded no complications with this implant model. Some authors would not recommend the RM Finger implant (Mathys) for PIP joint replacement. Arthroplasty of small joints of the hand with MOJE kermik-implantate showed satisfactory outcomes for 82 % of patients at a long term.Conclusion Arthroplasty of the PIP joint of the hand using various implant designs resulted in greater mobility of the upper limbs, a lower pain due to subjective improvement in the functionality at a long term. Although the procedures were effective with all implant designs the reliability of changes in the parameters was more evident with nonconstrained implants.

Surface replacing arthroplasty of a post-traumatic stiff and deviated proximal interphalangeal joint in an adolescent.

This case report describes the 4-year outcomes of proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty in a 14-year-old girl with a stiff joint after trauma. At follow-up, active range of motion was 35°, she was pain-free and satisfied with the outcome. Implant arthroplasty seems to be a valuable option for young patients with persistent post-traumatic stiff and deviated PIP joints to-at least temporarily-increase quality of life.

Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty for Fracture.

Proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasties can be performed in the setting of acute comminuted fracture, chronic fracture presentations, and posttraumatic arthritis. These surgeries provide excellent pain relief and patient satisfaction but patients should be cautioned not to expect an improvement in motion postoperatively. Despite high rates of minor complications and radiographic loosening, these implants have good rates of long-term survival with most revisions occurring in the early postoperative period. They provide viable alternatives to arthrodesis, osteotomy and amputation in the appropriate patient.

Prosthesis Options for Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty in Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Literature investigating the long-term outcomes of prosthesis options for proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty is scarce, with most reports combining indications and underlying pathologies in analyses. In this study, we aim to compare silicone, pyrocarbon and metal prostheses in PIP joint arthroplasty for primary degenerative osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: A review of scientific literature published between 1990 and 2021 was conducted. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Relevant studies were screened and the appropriate data was extracted. An evaluation of clinical outcomes (range of motion [ROM] and pain), complications (reoperation) and survival rates for each prosthesis was performed. Results: Twelve studies were included for analysis with a total of 412 PIP joints. ROM was 66.6°, 55.8° and 46.4° for metal, silicone and pyrocarbon implants, respectively. Silicone implants had the best pain score on the visual analogue scale (1.2) followed by the pyrocarbon (2.6) and metal (3.9) groups. Complication rates were lowest in silicone implants (11.3%) compared to 18.5% in pyrocarbon and 22.4% in metal prostheses. Survival did not differ significantly amongst the three groups. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that for patients with primary degenerative OA, PIP joint arthroplasty using a silicone prosthesis can provide greater pain relief with lower complication rates compared to other implant options. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).

Does distal interphalangeal joint arthrodesis affect proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty outcomes in the same finger?

The purpose of this study was to analyse the 1-year outcomes after combining a surface replacing proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty and a distal interphalangeal screw arthrodesis and to compare the combined surgery with proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty alone. To obtain two groups with similar baseline data from our prospective registry, propensity score matching was used to match 23 fingers with the combined operations with 115 fingers with proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty alone. One year after surgery, the mean ranges of motion were 60° (95% CI: 53° to 67°) in the combined group and 63° (95% CI: 60° to 66°) in the control group and did not differ significantly. Grip strength, the brief Michigan Hand Questionnaire and pain also did not differ between the groups 1 year after surgery. All the proximal interphalangeal implants in patients treated with a distal interphalangeal screw arthrodesis remained in situ. Combining proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty with distal interphalangeal arthrodesis leads to 1-year outcomes that are similar to those achieved by proximal interphalangeal joint replacement alone.Level of evidence: III.

Managing Difficult Problems in Small Joint Arthroplasty: Challenges, Complications, and Revisions.

Small joint arthroplasty of the hand has been an established means of joint preservation and pain relief for over a half a century. Despite this, metacarpophalangeal (MCP) and proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty has not achieved the long-term success seen with hip and knee arthroplasty. Problems following MCP, PIP, and carpometacarpal (CMC) joint arthroplasty can include intraoperative fracture, postoperative dislocation, recurrent pain, limitation of motion, and instability. The hand surgeon needs to be prepared for these problems and their management. This article addresses the management of the most common complications seen following MCP, PIP, and CMC arthroplasty.

Shifting the paradigm: ankylosis arthroplasty for the proximal interphalangeal joint with a novel collateral ligament reconstruction.

Silicone arthroplasty for proximal interphalangeal joint ankylosis is rarely performed, partly due to the potential for lateral joint instability. We present our experience performing proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty for joint ankylosis, using a novel reinforcement/reconstruction technique for the proper collateral ligament. Cases were prospectively followed-up (median 13.5 months, range 9-24) and collected data included range of motion, intraoperative collateral ligament status and postoperative clinical joint stability; a seven-item Likert scale (1-5) patient-reported outcomes questionnaire was also completed. Twenty-one ankylosed proximal interphalangeal joints were treated with silicone arthroplasty, and 42 collateral ligament reinforcements undertaken in 12 patients. There was improvement in range of motion from 0° in all joints to a mean of 73° (SD 12.3); lateral joint stability was achieved in 40 out of 42 of collateral ligaments. High median patient satisfaction scores (5/5) suggest that silicone arthroplasty with collateral ligament reinforcement/reconstruction should be considered as a treatment option in selected patients with proximal interphalangeal joint ankylosis.Level of evidence: IV.

Type of Work and Preoperative Ability to Perform Work Affect Return to Usual Work Following Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis.

The time until return to work (RTW) and possible factors affecting this time after proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty are unknown. Therefore, we aim to evaluate the RTW after PIP joint arthroplasty for osteoarthritis and assess factors affecting the time until return to their usual work. We used prospectively gathered data from 74 patients undergoing PIP joint arthroplasty with daily hand surgery practice routine outcome collection. Standardized RTW questionnaires were completed at 6 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Return to work was defined as the first time a patient reported returning to work and performing the original work for a minimum of 50% of the original hours a week, as stated in the patient's contract. Second, we evaluated baseline factors affecting the time until RTW. The probability of RTW within 12 months after surgery was 88%. The median time until RTW was 8 weeks (interquartile range: 4-10). Physical occupational intensity (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.36, P = .001) and the baseline Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire work scores (HR: 1.02, P = .005) were independently associated with RTW. In conclusion, patients returned to work after a median of 8 weeks following PIP arthroplasty. Patients with medium or heavy physical occupations returned to work later than patients with light physical occupations. Better patient-reported work outcomes at baseline also led to an earlier RTW. This information can be valuable for providing adequate information during the preoperative consultation.

Surgical approaches for proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty.

This annotation reviews current concepts on the three most common surgical approaches used for proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty: dorsal, volar, and lateral. Advantages and disadvantages of each are highlighted, and the outcomes are discussed.Cite this article: Bone Joint J2022;104-B(12):1329-1333.

Preoperative Thresholds of Pain and Function to Achieve a Minimal Important Change and Patient Acceptable Symptom State After Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty

There is ongoing discussion about the level of symptoms patients with proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint osteoarthritis should have to undergo surgery. The aims of our study were to determine the minimal important change (MIC) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for PIP joint range of motion (ROM), and define clinically relevant thresholds of preoperative pain and function at which patients have the greatest chance to achieve a MIC and PASS in these outcomes 1 year after PIP arthroplasty. We analyzed registry data that included patients with PIP joint osteoarthritis who underwent an arthroplasty for this condition and had a 1-year follow-up. Patients indicated pain on a numeric rating scale (0-10) and completed the brief Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ). Active total PIP ROM was measured. The preoperative thresholds, predictive of achieving the MIC and PASS for each outcome measure of pain, function, and ROM, were determined using receiver operating characteristics curves. We included 196 patients who experienced a relevant improvement in ROM (= MIC) when there was an increase by ≥8° compared with the ROM preoperatively. Patients were satisfied with their postoperative ROM (= PASS) if they achieved PIP mobility of at least 66°. Pain at rest and during activities was predictive for achieving a MIC but not a PASS. Due to an insufficient area under the curve for the brief MHQ and ROM, their baseline values cannot predict the postoperative achievement of MIC or PASS. We suggest that patients with preoperative pain at rest ≥4.5 or pain during activities ≥5.5 have the greatest chance of achieving a subjectively relevant change 1 year after surgery. The determined thresholds may support surgeons in the preoperative process of deciding for or against a surgical intervention and explain the probability of achieving sufficient postoperative symptom relief for the patient. Prognostic I.

Volar Plate Interposition Arthroplasty of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint: A Novel, Modified Malerich’s Technique

Summary:The choice of prosthetic or autologous reconstruction for proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty in degenerative osteoarthritis represents a challenge for hand surgeons, especially in consideration of complications and patient’s quality of life. We report the case of a 49-year-old woman who developed diffuse arthritis of the finger joints, especially at the PIP joint of the third right finger. Radiographs showed destruction of the PIP joint, large osteophytes, marked narrowing of joint space, severe sclerosis, and deformation of bone contour. Through a volar approach, we removed the osteophytes, reshaped the joint, and performed an arthroplasty with volar plate interposition. The patient had an improved range of motion at 3 months postoperatively. This case study gives a detailed description and discussion, together with literature revision, of volar plate interposition arthroplasty to treat PIP osteoarthritis, as an alternative to other methods.

An Outcomes Study of Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Silicone Implant Arthroplasty Using the Volar Approach.

Arthroplasty is performed at the proximal interphalangeal joint for the management of disabling osteoarthritis. This prospective cohort study evaluated outcomes of the silicone implant for the proximal interphalangeal joint using the volar approach. The authors hypothesize that the volar approach without extensor mechanism disruption will provide improved motion and maintain joint extension. Consecutive candidates for proximal interphalangeal joint silicone implant arthroplasty using the volar approach were evaluated. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire and functional measurements, including grip/pinch strength and arc of motion, were administered preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Twenty-eight patients (35 joints) were included in the study. Eighteen patients (24 joints) were followed to 1 year postoperatively, with an entire cohort average of 10-month follow-up. Nineteen patients were white women, and the mean age was 64 years. The authors' hypothesis was supported by the results showing a mean gain in arc of motion of 7 degrees and a mean 5-degree extension lag improvement at 1 year. The mean postoperative arc of motion was 53 degrees with a 10-degree average extension lag. The median Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire pain score improved from 70 (60 to 80) to 28 (5 to 45); scores also improved for each of the questionnaire domains. Median grip strength was unchanged. The volar approach to proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty is technically challenging but facilitates early aggressive rehabilitation. This is critical for providing improved flexion, especially in the ulnar digits without worsening extension lag. Therapeutic, IV.

Patient-Reported Outcomes 1 Year After Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis

Implant survival, range of motion, and complications of proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty have been reported often, but patient-reported outcomes are less frequently described. This study evaluated patients' experiences during the first year after proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty, measured with the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ). The primary focus was the reduction of patient-reported pain after proximal interphalangeal joint implant placement and the percentage of patients who considered this reduction clinically relevant, indicated by the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Data were collected prospectively; 98 patients completed the MHQ before and at 3 and 12 months after surgery. Our primary outcome was the change in the pain score. An increase of 24 points or more was considered a clinically important difference. Secondary outcomes included changes in MHQ total and subscale scores and MCIDs, range of motion (ROM), patient satisfaction with the outcome of the surgery, and complications. The pain score improved significantly, from 42 (95% confidence interval, 38-46) at baseline to 65 (95% confidence interval, 60-69) at 12 months after surgery. The MCID was reached by 50% (n = 49) of patients. The ROM did not improve, reoperations occurred in 13% (n= 13) of patients, and swan neck deformities only occurred among surface replacement implants. Although most patients undergoing arthroplasty for osteoarthritis experienced significantly less pain after surgery, the pain reduction was considered clinically relevant in only 50% (n= 49) of patients. Patients with high MHQ pain scores before surgery are at risk for postoperative pain reduction that will not be clinically relevant. Likewise, the other subscales of the MHQ improved after surgery, but reached a clinically relevant improvement in only 46% (n = 45) to 63% (n = 62) of patients. This knowledge can be used during preoperative consultation to improve shared decision making. Prognostic IV.

Outcomes of Multiple Digit Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Swanson Arthroplasty Done at a Single Operation

Background: Proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) arthroplasty using a Swanson implant is commonly used for the treatment of PIPJ arthritis despite newer implants being available. Many patients develop arthritis in more than one digit and some tend to have multiple digits operated on in their lifetime. There is paucity of literature on the outcomes of multiple PIPJ arthroplasty in one sitting. The aim of this study is to determine the outcomes of PIPJ arthroplasty using a Swanson implant done for multiple digits at one sitting. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of multiple Swanson PIPJ arthroplasty during a single operation from 2008 to 2018 in 13 patients (43 arthroplasties). We compared pre- and post-operative results of flexion/extension arcs, grip and pinch strength and questionnaires subsequently compared QuickDASH (Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand), Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM) and Visual Analogue Score (VAS) scores. Data were analysed with a Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Patients on average attended 5.6 hand therapy sessions over 5.1 months post-operatively. Average flexion/extension arc improved from 31.9° pre-operatively to 37.2° post-operatively. Average grip strength increased from 7.2 kg to 10.2 kg. The QuickDASH, PEM and VAS scores improved in keeping with the reported literature. There were no implant failures. Conclusion: We demonstrate similar outcomes for multi-digit Swanson PIPJ arthroplasty compared to the literature for single digit Swanson PIPJ arthroplasty. We conclude that multi-digit arthroplasty in a single operation is safe and effective. Level of Evidence: Level IV (Therapeutic).

Outcomes of Unconstrained Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

Background: Unconstrained pyrocarbon and metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty is an increasingly popular alternative to silicone implants and arthrodesis. This systematic review appraises their outcomes. Methods: Thirty studies comprising 1,324 joints (813 pyrocarbon, 511 MoP) were included. Mean patient age was 59 years (38-78) and mean follow-up period was 54 months (12-118). Results: There were mean improvements of 4.5 points (2-6.9) in pain visual analogue score, 10.5° (-26 to 58) in range of motion (ROM), 3.1 kg (-4 to 7) in grip strength, 0.6 kg (-1.5 to 2) in pinch strength and 18 points (-3 to 29) in the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand score, with no significant differences between implant types. ROM gains deteriorated over time. Clinical complications were frequent (23%) and significantly more common with pyrocarbon, as were radiographic complications. However, most were mild-moderate and did not necessarily correlate with negative outcomes or dissatisfaction. Overall re-operation rate was 21%, and revision rate 11%, both more frequent with pyrocarbon. Most revisions were within 24 months, beyond which survival was maintained up to 10 years. Conclusions: Unconstrained PIP joint arthroplasty is effective in improving pain scores, active ROM, grip/pinch strength and patient-reported outcome measures, particularly in patients with osteoarthritis. Results are generally maintained at least to the medium term, although gains diminish in the longer term. Complication and early revision rates are high, particularly with pyrocarbon implants. Most patients express positive attitudes to arthroplasty, with significant improvements in patient-reported outcome measures for both pyrocarbon and MoP implants. Patients with post-traumatic and inflammatory arthropathy are generally less satisfied. There is currently insufficient data to recommend one implant type over another, although the early-to-medium term results of MoP implants are promising. Prospective surveillance via small joint registries is recommended. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).

Proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty with the Tactys® prosthesis: Clinical and radiological outcomes at a mean 3.1 years’ follow-up

Preliminary results with the Tactys® modular gliding prosthesis for proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) replacement were encouraging, with notable improvement in clinical and functional scores at 1 and 2 years’ follow-up. However, a recent study found a trend for deterioration over time. We wanted to check this by analyzing medium-term outcomes. Sixty-four arthroplasties were performed in 48 patients in single facility between January 2015 and January 2020. Clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes were analyzed at short- and medium-term follow-up for 15 of these arthroplasties. Mean follow-up of the 48 patients was 3.1 years. Pain significantly decreased on the numeric rating scale (p < 0.01) and the functional QuickDASH score improved from 67.3 to 55.9 (p < 0.01). Grip and pinch strengths were lower in the operated than in the contralateral hand (p = 0.04 and p = 0.6, respectively). PIPJ active range of motion (ROM) in flexion/extension improved from 44° to 49.4° (p = 0.17). 70% of the 48 patients were satisfied. Fifteen arthroplasties were analyzed at 17 and 61 months’ follow-up. Pain relief continued. ROM decreased from 57° to 46° (p < 0.05) and the functional QuickDASH score deteriorated from 25.8 to 54.7 (p < 0.01). Both grip and pinch strength increased, with a significant difference in pinch (p = 0.003). The main complication was swan-neck deformity (46%), with a mean 11 months’ onset. Our results confirmed the deterioration trend observed over time in the functional results of the Tactys® prosthesis despite, good patient satisfaction. Level of evidence4.

Reported Outcomes and Outcome Measures in Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

Purpose: There is a lack of scientific consensus on the best arthroplasty implant option for proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) arthritis, due to diversity in outcome reporting and measurement methods. The development of a standardized core outcome set (COS) and standard outcome measures could mitigate this issue. This study catalogs the reported outcomes and outcome measures found in PIPJ arthroplasty studies, which can be used in the first step of developing a COS. Methods: A database search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science (January 1, 2010, to March 10, 2021) was performed to retrieve studies that reported outcomes of the 3 most common primary PIPJ arthroplasty implants: silicone, pyrocarbon, and metal-polyethylene. The primary objectives of this study include reported outcomes and outcome measures. Secondary objectives include clinimetric properties of outcome measures, study design, and implant types. Results: Fifty articles met inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, 41 (82%) were case series, 8 (16%) were cohort studies, and 1 (2%) was a randomized control trial. Thirty-three unique outcomes were identified. Fifteen (46%) outcomes were clinician-reported and 26 (79%) were patient-reported. Eighteen unique outcome measures were identified. Of the outcome measures, 15 (83%) were patient-reported, 1 (6%) was clinician-reported, and 2 (11%) were reported by both patients and clinicians. Conclusions: Substantial heterogeneity was found in reported outcomes and outcome measures across studies evaluating PIPJ arthroplasty, impeding knowledge translation. The development of a COS for PIPJ arthroplasty is necessary to help compare and pool data across studies, and advance scientific knowledge.

Outcomes of Unconstrained Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

Background: Unconstrained pyrocarbon and metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty is an increasingly popular alternative to silicone implants and arthrodesis. This systematic review appraises their outcomes. Methods: 30 studies comprising 1,324 joints (813 pyrocarbon, 511 MoP) were included. Mean patient age was 59 years (38 to 78) and mean follow-up period was 54 months (1.2 to 380). Results: There were mean improvements of 4.5 points (2 to 6.9) in pain Visual Analogue Score, 10.5° (-26 to 58) in range of motion (ROM), 3.1 kg (-4 to 7) in grip strength, 0.6 kg (-1.5 to 2) in pinch strength, and 18 points (-3 to 29) in the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, with no significant differences between implant types. ROM gains, in particular, deteriorated over time. Clinical complications were frequent (23%), and significantly more common with pyrocarbon, as were radiographic complications. However, most were mild-moderate and did not necessarily correlate with negative outcomes or dissatisfaction. Overall reoperation rate was 21%, and revision rate 11%, both more frequent with pyrocarbon. Most revisions were within 24 months, beyond which survival was maintained up to ten years. Conclusions: Unconstrained PIP joint arthroplasty is effective at improving pain scores, active ROM, grip/pinch strength, and patient reported outcome measures, particularly in patients with osteoarthritis. Results are generally maintained at least to the medium term, although gains diminish in the longer term. Complication and early revision rates are high, particularly with pyrocarbon implants. The majority of patients express positive attitudes to arthroplasty, with significant improvements in patient-reported outcome measures for both pyrocarbon and MoP implants. Patients with post-traumatic and inflammatory arthropathy are generally less satisfied. There is currently insufficient data to recommend one implant type over another, although the early-to-medium term results of MoP implants are promising. Prospective surveillance via small joint registries is recommended.

Systematic review of the introduction, early phase study and evaluation of pyrocarbon proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty.

BackgroundIn 2002 a pyrocarbon interphalangeal joint implant was granted Food and Drug Administration approval with limited evidence of effectiveness. It is important to understand device use and outcomes since this implant entered clinical practice in order to establish incremental evidence, appropriate study design and reporting. This systematic review summarised and appraised studies reporting pyrocarbon proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty.MethodsSystematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, BIOSIS, CINAHL and CENTRAL from inception to November 2020. All study designs reporting pyrocarbon proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty in humans were included. Data extracted included information about study characteristics, patient selection, regulatory (gaining research ethics approval) and governance issues (reporting of conflicting interests), operator and centre experience, technique description and outcome reporting. Descriptive and narrative summaries were reported.ResultsFrom 4316 abstracts, 210 full-text articles were screened. A total of 38 studies and 1434 (1–184) patients were included. These consisted of three case reports, 24 case series, 10 retrospective cohort studies and one randomised trial. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were stated in 25 (66%) studies. Most studies (n = 27, 71%) gained research ethics approval to be conducted. Six studies reported conflicting interests. Experience of operating surgeons was reported in nine (24%) and caseload volume in five studies. There was no consensus about the optimal surgical approach. Technical aspects of implant placement were reported frequently (n = 32) but the detail provided varied widely. Studies reported multiple, heterogenous outcomes. The most commonly reported outcome was range of motion (n = 37).ConclusionsThis systematic review identified inconsistencies in how studies describing the early use and update of an innovative procedure were reported. Incremental evidence was lacking, risking the implant being adopted without robust evaluation. This review adds to evidence highlighting the need for more rigorous evaluation of how implantable medical devices are used in practice following licencing.

Rehabilitation after proximal interphalangeal joint replacement: A structured review of the literature

Proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint arthroplasty is an unsolved biomechanical challenge despite advances in materials and new implant designs. This leads to a high rate of complications. Moreover, there is heterogeneity in postoperative management according to the literature. The present structured review examined the therapeutic strategies utilized by physiotherapists to restore a functional finger chain and prevent postoperative complications following PIP joint replacement. Patients undergoing primary total PIP joint arthroplasty of the index, ring, middle or little finger were included. Articles published from 2008 onwards, in French or English, and reporting on PIP joint replacement and postoperative management, were included. Therapeutic strategies were organized according to the surgical approach. Details of splint strategies, mobilization and muscle strengthening and management of postoperative complications were collected. Forty-eight studies, 3 of which provided a description of surgical techniques, were included. In relation to hand function, most authors advocated joint mobilization (n = 45) and some recommended muscle strengthening (n = 4). Static (n = 43) and dynamic splints (n = 14) and buddy taping (n = 12) were frequently recommended to prevent and manage postoperative complications. Few studies (n = 13) reported wound assessment or control of postoperative edema. Precise recommendations concerning therapeutic strategies following PIP joint arthroplasty cannot be made based on available evidence. Specific protocols for rehabilitation following PIP joint replacement need to be clarified in future research.