Clinical trial NCT05857683: Extension Pin Block vs Pin Orthosis-extension Block Pinning for Bonny Mallet Fractures
Official title: Extension Pin Block vs Pin Orthosis-extension Block Pinning for Bonny Mallet Fractures
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: UNKNOWN
Phase: NA
Conditions: Mallet Finger
Lead sponsor: Ankara University
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2023-05-12
Enrollment: 54
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 18
Standard ages: ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: TREATMENT

Brief summary: This is a single center prospective study comparing the extension pin block vs pin orthosis-extension block pinning for bonny mallet fractures.

Detailed description: Mallet finger is a fracture of the distal phalanx involving the dorsal articular surface. It is important because it concerns the extensor tendon attachment site. The clinical manifestation of mallet finger formation is active extension loss at the DIP joint. If the injury is not treated and becomes chronic, the DIP passive extension is gradually lost and a hyperextension posture occurs in the PIP joint due to the compensatory swan neck deformity. Non-surgical methods have an important place in the treatment of mallet finger injuries. The indications for surgical treatment of mallet finger injuries are a matter of debate. Conditions that are widely accepted as definite surgical indications are open injury, individuals who cannot work with a splint, the ruptured dorsal part is large and includes more than 30% of the articular surface, and the presence of palmar subluxation in the DIP. Among the mallet finger surgical treatments, the extension pin block technique , bracing in extension, hook method are defined.

In this prospective study, we aimed to compare the extension pin block technique with the pin orthosis-extension block pinning. In comparison, the patients eligible for the study will be evaluated according to Crawford criteria for function evaluation, complications (infection, nail deformities, skin necrosis, DIP joint osteoarthritis), recovery time.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* 18 years and older patients
* Wehbe classification type 2 b (Type Definition) I No DIP joint subluxation II DIP joint subluxation III Epiphyseal and physeal injuries Subtype A Avulsed fragment \<1/3 of articular surface B Avulsed fragment 1/3-2/3 of articular surface C Avulsed fragment \>2/3 of articular surface )
* Isolated bonny mallet fractures
* Minimum 1 year follow up
* Good cognitive status

Exclusion Criteria:

* Patients under the age of 18
* Open fracture
* Chronic mallet finger
* TFracture area that includes more than 50% of the joint face
* Patients whose follow-up less than 1 year

Primary outcomes:
measure: Crawford criteria
timeFrame: postoperative 1st day
measure: Crawford criteria
timeFrame: postoperative 1st month
measure: Crawford criteria
timeFrame: postoperative 3rd month
measure: Crawford criteria
timeFrame: postoperative 6th month
measure: Crawford criteria
timeFrame: postoperative 12th month
Secondary outcomes:
measure: complications
timeFrame: postoperative 1st day
measure: complications
timeFrame: postoperative 1st month
measure: complications
timeFrame: postoperative 3rd month
measure: complications
timeFrame: postoperative 6th month
measure: complications
timeFrame: postoperative 12th month
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Ankara
country: Turkey
facility: Ankara University Medical Faculty
Study officials:
References: