Gelişmiş Arama

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorDündar, Abdulrahim
dc.contributor.authorİpek, Deniz
dc.contributor.authorKaya, Şehmuz
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-07T10:16:53Z
dc.date.available2024-02-07T10:16:53Z
dc.date.issued2023en_US
dc.identifier.citationDündar, A., Şehmuz, K. A. Y. A., & Deniz, İ. P. E. K. (2023). Long-term outcomes of percutaneous release technique or open for trigger finger in diabetic patients. Journal of Medicine and Palliative Care, 4(4), 323-328.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2717-7505
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.47582/jompac.1327488
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11491/8804
dc.description.abstractAims: Trigger finger is seen more often in diabetic patients and can lead to more serious postoperative complications compared to non-diabetic patients. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of open and percutaneous release techniques in diabetic patients. Methods: This retrospective study included 62 patients who met the study criteria. Of these patients, 32 underwent open release surgery and 30 underwent percutaneous release with an 18-gauge needle. The patients were evaluated retrospectively in respect of the data on first presentation preoperatively and at postoperative follow-up examinations at 3 weeks, 6 months and 1 year. A retrospective examination was made of the demographic data, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores preoperatively, at 6 and 12 months postoperatively, recurrence rates at the end of 6 months and 1 year, the Quinnell grading scale at the end of 1 year, wound site infection, tendon damage and neurovascular complications. VAS scores and the Quinnell grading scale were used for clinical evaluation. Results: The data of a total of 62 patients were statistically analyzed in the study, with 32 (51.6%) in the Open group and 30 (48.4%) in the Percutaneous group. The mean age of the patients was 58.97±7.51 (min-max: 45-72) years. The distributions of trigger finger and Quinnell grading system scores were statistically similar between the groups (P=0.974, P=0.279, respectively). The recurrent triggering rate at the 6th and 12th month was significantly higher in the Percutaneous group (P=0.049, P=0.049, respectively). The average return to work duration in the Percutaneous group (1.70±0.75) was significantly shorter than that in the Open group (3.88±1.21) (P<0.001). Pre-op, Post-op 6th and 12th month VAS scores did not significantly differ between the groups (P=0.466, P=0.356, P=0.175, respectively). Conclusion: Although satisfactory results were obtained with both percutaneous and open release techniques in the patients with diabetes in this study, the percutaneous release technique was seen to be a method which can be easily performed in an outpatient setting and had fewer complications.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMediHealth Academy Yayıncılıken_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Medicine and Palliative Careen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectTrigger Fingeren_US
dc.subjectPercutaneousen_US
dc.subjectDiabetic Patientsen_US
dc.subjectOpen Surgeryen_US
dc.subjectQuinnell Gradingen_US
dc.titleLong-term outcomes of percutaneous release technique or open for trigger finger in diabetic patientsen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.departmentHitit Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümüen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Ulusal Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.contributor.institutionauthorDündar, Abdulrahim
dc.contributor.institutionauthorİpek, Deniz
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.47582/jompac.1327488en_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster