Overview
Patients with thumb carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis usually suffer from pain, joint enlargement, inflammation, deformity and loss of function. Conservative treatments usually are the first-line interventions, unfortunately some of the patients do not response to such treatments and surgical treatment will then be considered.
Compare to other traditional surgical techniques, arthroscopic techniques has resulted in the potential to treat osteoarthritis in a minimally invasive approach, avoiding the need for a larger incision. Other advantages of arthroscopy include less scarring and joint contracture, less risk of neurovascular injury, improved appearance, limited morbidity and quicker recovery. Although arthroscopic methods have been proved to be effective, there is lack of high-level evidence based studies to conclude one operation is superior to another. Hence, this study is designed to investigate outcomes of the two arthroscopic surgical methods (arthroscopic debridement vs arthroscopic hemi-trapeziectomy with Mini TightRope). The result of this study is expected to provide significant evidence based clinical data for surgeons worldwide on treating the thumb carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis.
Eligibility
Inclusion Criteria:
- Patients with Eaton and Glickel stage II and III of thumb carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis
- Age18 years old
- Failed to response to nonsurgical/conservative treatments including orthoses/splinting, activity modification, oral analgesics (e.g. nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), strengthening/flexibility exercises, and injections of corticosteroid or hyaluronic acid
- Willing to receive surgery
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients received previous thumb surgery proximal to the interphalangeal joint (IPJ)
- Patients with prior traumatic thumb injuries (e.g. fracture, dislocation)
- Patients with significant metacarpophalangeal joint (MCPJ) pain
- With concurrent procedures on the thumb, e.g. ganglion removal, trigger thumb release