Objective To compare the anesthetic effects of traditional digital block with single-injection digital block in digital injury patients for subcutaneous digital blocks. Methods Patients with one or two digits injured were randomized to the traditional digital block group and single-injection digital block group. All of the blocks were conducted by one investigator. The patients and outcome assessor were blinded to the treatment allocation. Both of the per-protocol-population (PP) analysis and the intention-to-treatment (ITT) analysis were performed to compare the two block techniques in terms of the pain during infiltration, the onset time of anesthesia and the failure rate of anesthesia. Results A total of 93 patients (109 digits) were included with 51 (61 digits) in the traditional block group and 42 (48 digits) in the single-injection block group.Two patients (3 digits) dropped out. Both of the PP analysis and ITT analysis showed that no significant difference between the two groups were detected in terms of the pain during infiltration, the onset time of anesthesia and the failure rate of anesthesia (P﹥0.05). Conclusions The subcutaneous single-injection digital block is as effective as the traditional digital block, but is much easier to perform. This technique is indicated for the digital anesthesia of palmar aspect distal to the proximal digital crease and dorsal aspect of the distal and middle phalanxes.
Objective To compare the effectiveness and complications of various surgical techniques in the treatment of the osteoarthritis of the trapeziometacarpal joint. Methods We searched MEDLINE (1966 to 2005), Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 3, 2005) and CBM (1978 to 2005), and handsearched the references of relevant studies. Only randomized controlled trials were included. We assessed the methodological quality of the included studies, extracted data, and performed quantitative and qualitative analyses. Results Seven studies were included, and all had some methodological shortcomings. There was b evidence that in the short term, ligamentous reconstruction, tendon interposition (LRTI) and trapeziectomy alone provide similar results with regard to pain relief, grip and pinch strength, range of thumb motion, hand function and overall satisfaction of patients, but more complications occur with LRTI than with trapeziectomy alone. Conflicting evidence was found about whether LRTI resulted in less subsidence of the first metacarpal bone than trapeziectomy alone. There was moderate evidence that LRTI and ligament reconstruction without tendon interposition (LR) did not have significant differences in thumb strength, patient satisfaction and subsidence of the first metacarpal bone. Limited evidence showed that LR produced better functional scores than LRTI and similar results in pain relief to LRTI. Conflicting evidence supported that LR resulted in greater motion range of thumb than LRTI. Only limited evidence showed that effectiveness was similar between LRTI and Swanson implant. We did not find randomized controlled trials about other surgical techniques. Conclusion Not enough evidence supports superiority of one technique over another. More high quality randomized controlled trials and long term follow-up are necessary.
Objective To evaluate the clinical outcomes of free perforator flaps combined with skin graft for reconstruction of ankle and foot soft tissue defects. Methods Between June 2014 and October 2015, 20 cases of ankle and foot soft tissue defects were treated. There were 16 males and 4 females, aged from 19 to 61 years (mean, 43.3 years). Injury was caused by traffic accident in 7 cases, by crashing in 9 cases, and machine twist in 4 cases. The locations were the ankle in 6 cases, the heel in 3 cases, the dorsum pedis in 4 cases, and the plantar forefoot in 7 cases of avulsion injury after toes amputation. The size of wound ranged from 15 cm×10 cm to 27 cm×18 cm. The time from injury to treatment was from 11 to 52 days (mean, 27 days). The anterolateral thigh perforator flap was used in 11 cases, thoracodorsal antery perforator flap in 3 cases, medial sural artery perforator flap in 4 cases, deep inferior epigastric perforator flap in 1 case, and anteromedial thigh perforator flap in 1 case, including 5 chimeric perforator flaps, 5 polyfoliate perforator flaps, 3 flow-through perforator flaps, and 3 conjoined perforator flaps. The size of the perforator flap ranged from 10.0 cm×6.5 cm to 36.0 cm×8.0 cm, the size of skin graft from 5 cm×3 cm to 18 cm×12 cm. Results Venous crisis occurred in 2 flaps which survived after symptomatic treatment; 18 flaps survived successfully and skin grafting healed well. The follow-up time ranged 4-18 months (mean, 8.3 months). The flaps had good appearance, texture and color, without infection. The patients could walk normally and do daily activities. Only linear scars were observed at the donor sites. Conclusion Free perforator flap can be used to reconstruct defects in the ankle and foot, especially in the weight-bearing area of the plantar forefoot. A combination of free perforator flap and skin graft is ideal in reconstruction of great soft tissue defects in the ankle and foot.