Treatment Of Trigger Finger Research Articles

RETRACTED: A randomized comparison of ultrasound-guided versus landmark-based corticosteroid injection for trigger finger.

One hundred and four patients who had been diagnosed with trigger finger and were to be treated by corticosteroid injection were randomized into two groups; one for landmark-based injection and the other for ultrasound-guided injection. The response to treatment, including objective triggering, the visual analogue scale score for pain and the Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) score were assessed at 12- and 24-weeks follow-up. No significant differences between the two groups were observed in pain or QuickDASH scores at 24 weeks of follow-up. The incidences of adverse events were similar between the two groups. Ultrasound-guided steroid injection provides no benefit in treating trigger finger. Level of evidence: II.

The Feasibility and Usability of a Ranking Tool to Elicit Patient Preferences for the Treatment of Trigger Finger

Shared decision making is an approach where physicians and patients collaborate to make decisions based on patient values. This requires eliciting patients' preferences for each treatment attribute before making decisions; a structured process for preference elicitation does not exist in hand surgery. We tested the feasibility and usability of a ranking tool to elicit patient preferences for the treatment of trigger finger. We hypothesized that the tool would be usable and feasible at the point of care. Thirty patients with a trigger finger without prior treatment were recruited from a hand surgery clinic. A preference elicitation tool was created that presented 3 treatment options(surgical release, injection, and therapy and orthosis) and described attributes of each treatment extracted from literature review (eg, success rate, complications). We presented these attributes to patients using the tool and patients ranked the relative importance (preference)of these attributes to aid in their decision making. The System Usability Scale and tool completion time were used to evaluate usability and feasibility, respectively. The tool demonstrated excellent usability (System Usability Scale: 88.7). The mean completion time was 3.05 minutes. Five (16.7%) patients chose surgery, 20 (66.7%) chose an injection, and 5 (16.7%) chose therapy and orthosis. Patients ranked treatment success and cost as the most and least important attributes, respectively. Twenty-nine (96.7%) patients were very to extremely satisfied with the tool. A preference elicitation tool for patients to rank treatment attributes by relative importance is feasible and usable at the point of care. A structured process for preference elicitation ensures that patients understand the trade-offs between choices and can assist physicians in aligning treatment decisions with patient preferences. A ranking tool is a simple, structured process physicians can use to elicit preferences during shared decision making and highlight trade-offs between treatment options to inform treatment choices.

Evaluación de resultados clínicos postoperatorios a corto y largo plazo de liberación percutánea con aguja vs técnica abierta de dedo en gatillo

Indroduction Trigger finger is very common in the population, with a life-threatening risk of developing the disease of 2.6% in the general population and increasing to 4 to 10% in diabetics. Since there is no standard gold of surgical treatment and there is still controversy in this, it is important to evaluate the results of the different surgical techniques. The objective of this study is to evaluate postoperative results of both surgical techniques in patients with follow-up of 1 to 12 months postoperative. Material and methods It is a prospective, longitudinal, descriptive and observational study carried out in a period from January 2015 to December 2017. Postoperative open (group 1) and percutaneous needle (group 2) patients were included. All patients were reviewed and surveyed by telephone. The comparison results of both techniques were analyzed using 2 for parametric results and by the Fisher test for nonparametric results. Results It was found that patients in group 2 expressed greater satisfaction, where 21.8% (n = 12) were fully satisfied with the percutaneous procedure, unlike those in group 1 where total satisfaction was only manifested at 3.8% (n = 2). Conclusions In this study we can conclude that both techniques are effective for the treatment of trigger finger, with percutaneous needle release offering the highest degree of satisfaction in patients.

Surgical treatment of trigger finger? Longitudinal incision versus transverse incision?

Surgical treatment of trigger finger? Longitudinal incision versus transverse incision?

Percutaneous trigger finger release using 18G hypodermic needle

Introductions: Patients of stenosing tenosynovitis or trigger finger presents with pain, swelling, limitation of finger movement, and triggering. Thickening of the A1 pulley, with resultant entrapment of flexor tendons, is the primary pathology. In failed conservative treatment, surgical release by open or percutaneous technique is used. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of percutaneous release of trigger fingers using hypodermic 18-gauge needle under local anesthesia.
 Methods: A cross sectional study of percutaneous release of trigger fingers using hypodermic 18-gauge needle under local anesthesia was performed in outpatient clinic at Janaki Medical College Teaching Hospital, Janakpur, Nepal, from July 2016 to September 2017. Informed consent was obtained. All the patients were followed up on 3rd day, 1st week and one month in outpatient department, and further telephone follow up at three and six months after surgery.
 Results: There were 38 patients, female 25 and male 13, age 24 to 67 years. Successful release was achieved in 36/38 (95%) with normal activities within 48 hours. None had complications like digital neurovascular injury or tendon bowstringing. One patient had superficial skin infection and was treated successfully with oral antibiotics. Two (5.2%) had pain and recurrent triggering requiring open release in the first week. At one, three and six months follow up patients reported no triggering of released fingers.
 Conclusions: Percutaneous release with hypodermic 18-gauge needle under local anesthesia in the treatment of trigger finger was an effective and convenient method with a low complication rate.

Outcomes of Corticosteroid Treatment for Trigger Finger by Stage.

Although steroid injection remains a common first-line treatment of trigger finger, clinical experience suggests that not all cases of trigger finger respond the same. The purpose of this study was to use a classification system for trigger finger that is simple and reproducible, and produces clearly definable, clinically relevant cutoff points to determine whether responsiveness to steroid injection correlates to clinical staging. The authors conducted a prospectively collected longitudinal study of trigger finger patients separated into four stages of severity. Each subject received a single injection of 6 mg of dexamethasone acetate. One-month outcomes were analyzed to evaluate the efficacy of steroid injection. These outcomes were further stratified based on baseline characteristics and stage of triggering. A total of 99 digits and 69 subjects were included. Two variables were found to be significant in predicting response to initial injection: (1) multiple affected digits and (2) stage severity. Patients with multiple involved fingers were 5.8 times more likely to have no resolution of symptoms compared with those with a single affected finger. For every level of stage increase, the odds doubled for having no resolution of symptoms. Steroid injection remains a viable first-line option for patients presenting with mild triggering (stage 1 and 2). For more severe triggering (stage 3 and 4) or multiple affected digits, the success of steroid injection is significantly lower at 1 month. For the latter patients, surgery may be a more reasonable initial treatment. Risk, II.

Establishing an Efficient Care Paradigm for Trigger Finger.

To identify the time course for efficacy of corticosteroid injections in the treatment of trigger finger. A prospective single-center observational study was conducted, consisting of 38 patients with 41 trigger digits that were injected. Enrolled patients completed an initial Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire to determine the severity of their symptoms. Following the injection, patients were contacted at scheduled time points for up to 12 weeks to determine if, and when, objective resolution of symptoms occurred. Patients who received additional treatment, such as a second injection or surgery, and those who did not have objective relief of symptoms by 12 weeks were classified as failed. Upon symptom resolution or injection failure, patients were given a DASH exit questionnaire. 30 of 41 injected trigger digits resolved and 11 failed treatment with a single corticosteroid injection. The latest that any study participant experienced resolution of symptoms was 69 days. At 38 days, the rate of resolution of the study population slowed significantly. Although symptomatic resolution of trigger finger from a single corticosteroid injection can occur early on, a follow-up of 4 weeks (28 days) does not allow enough time for symptom resolution. The earliest a surgeon and patient should consider a secondary treatment is at 38 days. After 69 days without resolution, both surgeon and patient can be confident that further treatment is needed.

Ultrasound-guided, percutaneous, needle technique, A1-pulley release for trigger finger

Trigger finger is a common cause of hand pain and disability and an A1-pulley dividing, percutaneous release is a definitive treatment for advanced stage disease. High-resolution, musculoskeletal ultrasonography provides clear visualization of the A1-pulley and flexor tendon, however, the evidence to support ultrasonographic guidance of this procedure is scarce. This study aim to evaluate the results of ultrasound (US)-guided, percutaneous, needle technique, annular, A1-pulley release for trigger finger (TF); specifically identifying whether this minimally-invasive procedure had low complication rates and enables early functional recovery. Single center, prospective cohort study of consecutive patients who were > 20 years of age, had grade II TF or higher for at least 4 months, and were unresponsive to conservative treatment. Patients with chronic connective tissue disease, rheumatoid arthritis, previous TF surgery, pregnancy, or bleeding risks were excluded. The procedure was an US-guided percutaneous A1-pulley release using needle technique. Outcome measures at 1 week post-surgery included; recovery time, pain level and duration, use of analgesic medications, time to normal activity of affected TF, and subject satisfaction for cosmesis and overall results. Surgical complications were monitored for 6 months. Thirty-nine fingers from 33 patients who received US-guided, percutaneous, A1-pulley release using needle technique were included in the analysis. Mean operative time was 6.17 (SD = 1.70) minutes. Median postoperative pain duration, use of analgesic medications, and recovery time to normal activity were 1.0 (IQR = 0–2), 0.5 day (IQR = 0.5–1), and 2 days (IQR = 1–2), respectively. Mean subject satisfaction scores for wound appearance and overall treatment were 9.87 and 9.61, respectively. Only one patient had an incomplete release and no severe complication were observed. US-guided, percutaneous, A1-pulley release with needle technique was an effective treatment for TF, with high levels of overall satisfaction and no significant complications.

Surgery for trigger finger

Surgery for trigger finger

Efficacy of Corticosteroid Injection for Treatment of Trigger Finger: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ABSTRACTPurpose: To determine the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid injection for trigger finger by performing a meta-analysis of all relevant studies. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing corticosteroid injection with other treatments for trigger finger. Pooled summary estimates for outcomes, including success rate, relapse rate, visual analogue score (VAS) and complications, were calculated as standardized mean difference (SMD) or relative risk (RR) either on a fixed- or random-effect model via Stata 12.0 software. Results: Ten literatures involving 806 patients (387 in corticosteroid injection group and 419 in control group) were included. Pooled analysis showed there were no differences in the success rate, VAS and complications between patients undergoing corticosteroid injection and others. However, the relapse rate was significantly higher in patients treated with corticosteroid injection than that of other treatments (RR = 19.53, 95% CI = 6.23–61.19). Subgroup analysis indicated the efficacy of corticosteroid injection was superior to other non-surgical treatments (success rate: RR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.01–2.35), but inferior to surgery (success rate: RR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.48–0.63; relapse rate: RR = 21.15, 95% CI = 6.06–73.85; VAS: SMD = 3.49, 95% CI = 2.84–4.14). Conclusions: Corticosteroid injection may be an effective strategy for management of trigger finger, although surgery may be needed for some patients due to recurrence.

The efficacy of local corticosteroid injection in the treatment of trigger finger

Background and Objectives: Trigger finger is a condition that causes triggering, snapping or locking on flexion of the involved digit. Treatment modalities are conservative (Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, splints or corticosteroid injections) or operative (percutaneous or open release of A1 pulley- the first annular pulley of the fibro-osseous sheath of the fingers situated at the level of the metacarpophalengeal joint). The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of corticosteroid injection for trigger finger in adults.Material and Methods: Fifty patients with 54 trigger digits were treated by one or two injections of methylprednisolone acetate with 1% lignocaine. Patients were followed-up for a period of 6 months.Results: Symptoms and signs resolved in 79.63% of the injected digits. Local adverse reactions to steroid injection- pain at the injection site and steroid flare were self-limiting. There was no tendon rupture or post-injection infection.Conclusion: The study concludes that steroid injection is an effective first line treatment for trigger finger in most patients.Janaki Medical College Journal of Medical Sciences (2017) Vol. 5(2): 13-18

Treatment of Trigger Fingers with Flexion Contracture of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint by Resection of the Ulnar Slip of the Flexor Digitorum Superficialis Tendon

Treatment of Trigger Fingers with Flexion Contracture of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint by Resection of the Ulnar Slip of the Flexor Digitorum Superficialis Tendon

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) for trigger finger

Background Trigger finger is a common hand condition that occurs when movement of a finger flexor tendon through the first annular (A1) pulley is impaired by degeneration, inflammation, and swelling. This causes pain and restricted movement of the affected finger. Non-surgical treatment options include activity modification, oral and topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), splinting, and local injections with anti-inflammatory drugs. Objectives To review the benefits and harms of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) versus placebo, glucocorticoids, or different NSAIDs administered by the same route for trigger finger. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, www.ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO trials portal until 30 September 2020. We applied no language or publication status restrictions. Selection criteria We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials of adult participants with trigger finger that compared NSAIDs administered topically, orally, or by injection versus placebo, glucocorticoid, or different NSAIDs administered by the same route. Data collection and analysis Two or more review authors independently screened the reports, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence. The seven major outcomes were resolution of trigger finger symptoms, persistent moderate or severe symptoms, recurrence of symptoms, total active range of finger motion, residual pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. Treatment effects were reported as risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Main results Two RCTs conducted in an outpatient hospital setting were included (231 adult participants, mean age 58.6 years, 60% female, 95% to 100% moderate to severe disease). Both studies compared a single injection of a non-selective NSAID (12.5 mg diclofenac or 15.0 mg ketorolac) given at lower than normal doses with a single injection of a glucocorticoid (triamcinolone 20 mg or 5 mg), with maximum follow-up duration of 12 weeks or 24 weeks. In both studies, we detected risk of attrition and performance bias. One study also had risk of selection bias. The effects of treatment were sensitive to assumptions about missing outcomes. All seven outcomes were reported in one study, and five in the other. NSAID injection may offer little to no benefit over glucocorticoid injection, based on low- to very low-certainty evidence from two trials. Evidence was downgraded for bias and imprecision. There may be little to no difference between groups in resolution of symptoms at 12 to 24 weeks (34% with NSAIDs, 41% with glucocorticoids; absolute effect 7% lower, 95% confidence interval (CI) 16% lower to 5% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.11; low-certainty evidence). The rate of persistent moderate to severe symptoms may be higher at 12 to 24 weeks in the NSAIDs group (28%) compared to the glucocorticoid group (14%) (absolute effect 14% higher, 95% CI 2% to 33% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.46; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether NSAIDs result in fewer recurrences at 12 to 24 weeks (1%) compared to glucocorticoid (21%) (absolute effect 20% lower, 95% CI 21% to 13% lower; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.38; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in mean total active motion at 24 weeks (235 degrees with NSAIDs, 240 degrees with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 5% lower, 95% CI 34.54% lower to 24.54% higher; 1 study, 99 participants; MD -5.00, 95% CI -34.54 to 24.54; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in residual pain at 12 to 24 weeks (20% with NSAIDs, 24% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 4% lower, 95% CI 11% lower to 7% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.31; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in participant-reported treatment success at 24 weeks (64% with NSAIDs, 68% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 4% lower, 95% CI 18% lower to 15% higher; 1 study, 121 participants; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.23; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether NSAID injection has an effect on adverse events at 12 to 24 weeks (1% with NSAIDs, 1% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 0% difference, 95% CI 2% lower to 3% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.42; very low-certainty evidence). Authors' conclusions For adults with trigger finger, by 24 weeks' follow-up, results from two trials show that compared to glucocorticoid injection, NSAID injection offered little to no benefit in the treatment of trigger finger. Specifically, there was no difference in resolution, symptoms, recurrence, total active motion, residual pain, participant-reported treatment success, or adverse events.

Needle-Free Jet Lidocaine Administration for Preinjection Anesthesia in Trigger Finger Injection: A Randomized Controlled Trial

To evaluate the efficacy of needle-free jet lidocaine (J-tip) administration for pain reduction in trigger finger corticosteroid injection compared with simultaneous lidocaine injection with corticosteroid. A prospective randomized clinical trial was performed in which patients received either 0.25 mL of 2% lidocaine administered by J-tip just prior to 0.5 mL of corticosteroid injection by needle or 0.5 mL of 1% lidocaine and 0.5 mL of corticosteroid administered simultaneously through a needle for the treatment of trigger finger. Both the expected painpreinjection and the actual pain experienced postinjection were measured with a visualanalog scale (VAS). Pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) scores were recorded before injection. The use of the J-tip demonstrated a lower mean actual pain, 3.3 VAS, compared with the control group, 4.6 VAS. Both study groups anticipated more pain than they actually experienced. The PCS did not correlate to pre- or post-injection scores. Needle-free jet administration of lidocaine reduces the pain associated with trigger finger injection. Patients anticipate more pain than they experience with trigger finger injection. Therapeutic I.

Progression from Injection to Surgery for Trigger Finger: A Statistical Analysis.

The purpose of this study was to identify predictive factors of poor response to intra-flexoral sheath corticosteroid injection, as well as to identify factors associated with patients' decisions to undergo surgical treatment. Data from 112 patients who received steroid injection treatment for trigger finger were reviewed retrospectively. Logistic regression was used to assess the prognostic value of factors assumed to affect prognosis (age, sex, underlying disease, history of illness, presence of carpal tunnel syndrome, multiple digit involvement, and pre- and post-operative disability scores). Multiple digits were affected in 42 patients. Associated and underlying conditions were carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 36), hypertension (n = 23), hyperlipidemia (n = 14), and history of malignant tumor (n = 10). Logistic regression analysis showed that multiple digit involvement and Froimson clinical severity score were factors significantly associated with surgical treatment after intra-flexoral sheath corticosteroid injection treatment. These two factors were also found to be associated with the patients' decisions to undergo surgical treatment. Although local corticosteroid injection is useful in most cases, providers need to counsel patients with multiple digit involvement and/or severe cases about the possibility of requiring additional surgical treatment.

Trigger Finger: An Atraumatic Medical Phenomenon.

Trigger finger is a mechanical problem with many etiological factors as possible causes, such as diabetes mellitus, carpal tunnel syndrome and repetitive finger movements. Although it can afflict anyone, it is much commoner in middle-aged women than men and the most commonly involved digit is reported to be the thumb. The diagnosis is mainly based on clinical symptoms during examination and first-line treatment is conservative with splinting and corticosteroid injections. Surgical open release is the "gold standard" of trigger finger treatment because it allows more careful inspection of the surgical area and is highly effective with low complication rates.

Abstract 54. Outcomes of Corticosteroid Treatment of Trigger Finger by Stage

Purpose: While the literature reports that trigger fingers have a 90% response rate to a steroid injection, clinical experience suggests that not all trigger fingers respond the same. The purpose of this study was to refine a classification system for trigger finger that is simple and reproducible, with clearly definable and clinically relevant cutoff points, and then use the classification system to determine if responsiveness to steroid injection correlates to clinical staging. Methods: This was a prospectively collected longitudinal study of trigger finger patients separated into four stages of severity. Each subject received a single dose of 6 mg betamethasone acetate. One month outcomes were analyzed to evaluate efficacy of steroid injection. These outcomes were further stratified based on baseline characteristics and stage of triggering. Results: A total of 99 digits and 69 subjects were included. Two variables were found to be significant in predicting response to initial injection: 1. Multiple affected digits 2. Stage severity. Patients with multiple involved fingers were 5.8 times more likely to have no resolution of symptoms compared to those with a single affected finger. For every level of stage increase, the odds double for having no resolution of symptoms. Conclusion: Steroid injection remains a viable first-line option for patients presenting with mild triggering (Stage 1 and 2). For more severe triggering (Stage 3 and 4), or multiple affected digits, success of steroid injection is significantly lower at one month. For these patients, surgery may be a reasonable initial treatment.

Three-dimensional printing of a microneedle array on personalized curved surfaces for dual-pronged treatment of trigger finger

The hand function of patients who suffer from trigger finger can be impaired by the use of traditional splints. There is also a risk of systemic side effects with oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) used for pain relief. Microneedle-assisted transdermal drug delivery offers an attractive alternative for local delivery of NSAIDs. However, traditional microneedle arrays fabricated on flat surfaces are unable to deliver drugs effectively across the undulating skin surface of affected finger(s). In this study, using 3D printing, a dual-function microneedle array has been fabricated on personalized curved surfaces (microneedle splint) for drug delivery and splinting of the affected finger. The novel microneedle splint was assessed for its physical characteristics and the microneedles were shown to withstand up to twice the average thumb force without fracturing. An average skin penetration efficiency of 64% on dermatomed human cadaver skin was achieved and the final microneedle splint showed biocompatibility with human dermal cell lines. A significantly higher amount of diclofenac permeated through the skin by 0.5 h with the use of the microneedle splint as compared to intact skin. The fabricated microneedle splint can thus be a potential new approach to treat trigger finger via personalized splinting without affecting normal hand function.

Percutaneous surgery using Admix NoKorTM Non-Coring 16 G needle in cases with trigger finger

In this study mid- and long-term outcomes of the cases with trigger finger we treated using Admix NoKorTM have been presented. Percutaneous release procedures were applied for 24 fingers of 22 (19 female, 3 male patients; mean age, 57; range, 39-72) patients between May 2009 and May 2011. Preoperatively US was performed so as to confirm the presence of trigger finger. Diameters of the tendons of the affected and intact hands measured using US, were compared so as to be able to demonstrate thickening of the tendon of the trigger finger. The patients were monitored for an average period of 25.2 (range, 14-36) months. During surgery, clinically loss of the catching sensation was observed. In two patients percutaneous trigger finger release failed, so we have to proceed with open surgery. During open surgery, we observed longitudinal wounds on the tendon. One patient developed unilateral radial digital nerve damage. Percutaneous release of the trigger finger using Admix NoKorTM 16-G gauge needle can be preferred in the treatment of trigger finger. Trigger finger of the first digit requires more attentive approach and one should be aware of the complications. If required open surgery can be preferred.

Comparative clinical study of ultrasound-guided A1 pulley release vs open surgical intervention in the treatment of trigger finger.

AIMTo investigate the effectiveness of ultrasound-guided release of the first annular pulley and compare results with the conventional open operative technique.METHODSIn this prospective randomized, single-center, clinical study, 32 patients with trigger finger or trigger thumb, grade II-IV according to Green classification system, were recruited. Two groups were formed; Group A (16 patients) was treated with an ultrasound-guided percutaneous release of the affected A1 pulley under local anesthesia. Group B (16 patients) underwent an open surgical release of the A1 pulley, through a 10-15 mm incision. Patients were assessed pre- and postoperatively (follow-up: 2, 4 and 12 wk) by physicians blinded to the procedures. Treatment of triggering (primary variable of interest) was expressed as the “success rate” per digit. The time for taking postoperative pain killers, range of motion recovery, QuickDASH test scores (Greek version), return to normal activities (including work), complications and cosmetic results were assessed.RESULTSThe success rate in group A was 93.75% (15/16) and in group B 100% (16/16). Mean times in group A patients were 3.5 d for taking pain killers, 4.1 d for returning to normal activities, and 7.2 and 3.9 d for complete extension and flexion recovery, respectively. Mean QuickDASH scores in group A were 45.5 preoperatively and, 7.5, 0.5 and 0 after 2, 4, and 12 wk postoperatively. Mean times in group B patients were 2.9 d for taking pain killers, 17.8 d for returning to normal activities, and 5.6 and 3 d for complete extension and flexion recovery. Mean QuickDASH scores in group B were 43.2 preoperatively and, 8.2, 1.3 and 0 after 2, 4, and 12 wk postoperatively. The cosmetic results found excellent or good in 87.5% (14/16) of group A patients, while in 56.25% (9/16) of group B patients were evaluated as fair or poor.CONCLUSIONTreatment of the trigger finger using ultrasonography resulted in fewer absence of work days, and better cosmetic results, in comparison with the open surgery technique. It is a promising method that represents excellent results without major complications, so that it could be possibly be established as a first-line treatment in the trigger finger’s disease.