KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1

Factors predicting reoperation after hand flexor tendon repair

El fleksör tendon onarımı sonrası reoperasyonu öngören faktörler

Aslı UÇKUN ÇALIŞKAN
Fatma Gül YURDAKUL
Hasan Murat ERGANİ
Tuba GÜLER
Yaşar Burak USLU
Bedriye MERMERCİ BAŞKAN
Hatice BODUR
Ramazan Erkin ÜNLÜ
Sayfa
115–122
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

CONCLUSION: To minimize the need for reoperation, surgeons and rehabilitation teams should take special care of patients with zone 2 injuries, high MHISS values, and smoking history.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:BACKGROUND: This single-center, retrospective study aims to analyze the sociodemographic, injury characteristics, and the total number of lost working days of patients undergoing hand flexor tendon repair and to identify factors predicting reoperation.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:METHODS: Hand flexor tendon repairs conducted using a four-strand modified Kessler core suture with early rehabilitation from January 2013 to December 2016 were included in this study.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:CONCLUSION: To minimize the need for reoperation, surgeons and rehabilitation teams should take special care of patients with zone 2 injuries, high MHISS values, and smoking history.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2013 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

BACKGROUND: This single-center, retrospective study aims to analyze the sociodemographic, injury characteristics, and the total number of lost working days of patients undergoing hand flexor tendon repair and to identify factors predicting reoperation. METHODS: Hand flexor tendon repairs conducted using a four-strand modified Kessler core suture with early rehabilitation from January 2013 to December 2016 were included in this study. The variables evaluated in this study were patient sociodemographic and injury characteristics, number of lost working days, and reoperations because of rupture and/or adhesion formation. Injury severity was determined using Modified Hand Injury Severity Scoring (MHISS). Binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the predictors of reoperation. RESULTS: A total of 194 patients were included in this study, who had experienced 329 tendon injuries. Participants were young (mean age, 31.8), mostly male (79.4%), and mostly blue-collar workers (50.0%). Most patients had a zone 2 injury affecting a single digit of the dominant hand. The mean MHISS value was 46.6, and the mean time to return to work was 114.0 days. A total of 37 (19.1%) patients required reoperation because of rupture and/or adhesion formation. Smoking, zone 2 injury, and high MHISS value were negative predictors of reoperation. CONCLUSION: To minimize the need for reoperation, surgeons and rehabilitation teams should take special care of patients with zone 2 injuries, high MHISS values, and smoking history.

Abstract

AMAÇ: Bu tek merkezli, geriye dönük çalışma, el fleksör tendon onarımı geçiren hastaların sosyodemografik, yaralanma özelliklerini ve toplam kayıp iş günlerini analiz etmeyi ve reoperasyonu öngören faktörleri tanımlamayı amaçlamaktadır. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Ocak 2013–Aralık 2016 tarihleri arasında erken rehabilitasyona tabi, dört geçişli modifiye Kessler kor dikiş kullanılarak yapılan el fleksör tendon onarımları dahil edildi. Bu çalışmada değerlendirilen değişkenler; hasta sosyodemografik ve yaralanma özellikleri, kayıp iş günü sayısı ve rüptür ve/veya adezyon oluşumu nedeniyle yapılan reoperasyonlardı. Yaralanma ciddiyeti, Modifiye El Yaralanması Ciddiyet Skorlaması (MEYCS) kullanılarak belirlendi. Reoperasyonun öngörücülerini belirlemek için ikili lojistik regresyon analizi yapıldı. BULGULAR: Toplam 329 tendon yaralanması geçirmiş 194 hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Katılımcılar genç (ortalama yaş, 31.8), çoğunlukla erkek (%79.4) ve mavi yakalı çalışanlardı (%50.0). Hastaların çoğu dominant elin tek parmağını etkileyen zon 2 yaralanmasına sahipti. Ortalama MEYCS değeri 46.6 ve işe geri dönüş süresi 114.0 gündü. Toplam 37 (%19.1) hastaya rüptür ve/veya adezyon oluşumu nedeniyle reoperasyon gerekti. Sigara içimi, zon 2 yaralanması ve yüksek MEYCS değeri, reoperasyonun negatif belirleyicileriydi. TARTIŞMA: Reoperasyon ihtiyacını en aza indirmek için, cerrahlar ve rehabilitasyon ekibi, bölge 2 yaralanması, yüksek MEYCS değerleri ve sigara içme öyküsü olan hastalara özel dikkat göstermelidir

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÇALIŞKAN, A. U., YURDAKUL, F. G., ERGANİ, H. M., GÜLER, T., USLU, Y. B., BAŞKAN, B. M., BODUR, H., ÜNLÜ, R. E. (2020). Factors predicting reoperation after hand flexor tendon repair. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 26 - Sayı: 1, 115–122. https://ajindex.com/articles/323438

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (16)

  1. Sikora S, Lai M, Arneja JS. Pediatric flexor tendon injuries: A 10-year outcome analysis. Can J Plast Surg 2013;21:181−5
  2. Rigo IZ, Røkkum M. Predictors of outcome after primary flexor tendon repair in zone 1, 2 and 3. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2016;41:793−801
  3. Tang JB. Flexor tendon repair in zone 2C. J Hand Surg Br 1994;19:72−5
  4. Chesney A, Chauhan A, Kattan A, Farrokhyar F, Thoma A. Systematic review of flexor tendon rehabilitation protocols in zone II of the hand. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;127:1583−92
  5. Dy CJ, Hernandez-Soria A, Ma Y, Roberts TR, Daluiski A. Complications after flexor tendon repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hand Surg Am 2012;37:543−51
  6. Dy CJ, Daluiski A, Do HT, Hernandez-Soria A, Marx R, Lyman S. The epidemiology of reoperation after flexor tendon repair. J Hand Surg Am 2012;37:919−24
  7. Elliot D, Giesen T. Treatment of unfavourable results of flexor tendon surgery: Ruptured repairs, tethered repairs and pulley incompetence. Indian J Plast Surg 2013;46:458−71
  8. Pulos N, Bozentka DJ. Management of complications of flexor tendon injuries. Hand Clin 2015;31:293−9
  9. Edsfeldt S, Eklund M, Wiig M. Prognostic factors for digital range of motion after intrasynovial flexor tendon injury and repair: Long-term follow-up on 273 patients treated with active extension-passive flexion with rubber bands. J Hand Ther 2019;32:328−33
  10. Starnes T, Saunders RJ, Means KR Jr. Clinical outcomes of zone II flexor tendon repair depending on mechanism of injury. J Hand Surg Am 2012;37:2532−40
  11. Fujihara Y, Ota H, Watanabe K. Utility of early active motion for flexor tendon repair with concomitant injuries: A multivariate analysis. Injury 2018;49:2248−51
  12. Urso-Baiarda F, Lyons RA, Laing JH, Brophy S, Wareham K, Camp D. A prospective evaluation of the Modified Hand Injury Severity Score in predicting return to work. Int J Surg 2008;6:45−50
  13. Chang MK, Tay SC. Flexor Tendon Injuries and Repairs: A Single Centre Experience. J Hand Surg Asian Pac Vol 2018;23:487−95
  14. Thangavelu M, Veerasamy N, Kanthan A. Study on evaluation and management of hand injuries. J Evolution Med Dent Sci 2016;5:4703−6
  15. Marom BS, Ratzon NZ, Carel RS, Sharabi M. Return-to-Work Barriers Among Manual Workers After Hand Injuries: 1-Year Follow-up Cohort Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2019;100:422−32
  16. Savvidou C, Tsai TM. Clinical Results of Flexor Tendon Repair in Zone II Using a six Strand Double Loop Technique. J Hand Microsurg 2015;7:25−9. 17