We compared 84 patients with the Ivory trapeziometacarpal prosthesis versus 62 with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition arthroplasty performed for osteoarthritis. There were 134 women and 12 men with a mean age of 60 years. Prospective clinical assessment was made using the Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, visual analogue scale for pain, range of motion, and grip and pinch strength. The mean follow-up was 4 years (range 2–5). Prosthetic replacement provided significantly better thumb abduction, adduction, pinch strength, QuickDASH, pain relief, satisfaction and a faster return to daily activities and previous work. Revision surgery was required for two patients in the prosthesis group, two for dislocation and one cup loosening, while in the ligament reconstruction group there were no revisions. We conclude that trapeziometacarpal prosthesis provides better mid-term results in terms of function compared with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition for patients with Stages 2 and 3 osteoarthritis of the trapeziometacarpal joint.
BadiaASambandamSN. Total joint arthroplasty in the treatment of advanced stages of thumb carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis. J Hand Surg Am. 2006, 31: 1605–14.
2.
BeatonDEWrightJGKatzJN. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005, 87: 1038–46.
3.
BricoutMRezzoukJ. Complications and failures of the trapeziometacarpal Maia prosthesis: a series of 156 cases. Hand Surg Rehabil. 2016, 35: 190–8.
4.
BurtonRIPellegriniVDJr. Surgical management of basal joint arthritis of the thumb, Part II. Ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition arthroplasty. J Hand Surg Am. 1986, 11: 324–32.
5.
CatalanoCLHorneLTFischerEBarronAGlickelSZ. Comparison of ligament reconstruction tendon interposition and trapeziometacarpal interposition arthroplasty for basal joint arthritis. Orthopedics. 2008, 31: 228–32.
6.
CootjansKVanhaeckeJDezillieMBarthJPottelHStockmansF. Joint survival analysis and clinical outcome of total joint arthroplasties with the ARPE implant in the treatment of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis with a minimal follow-up of 5 years. J Hand Surg Am. 2017, 42: 630–8.
7.
De la CaffiniereJYAucouturierP. Trapezio-metacarpal arthroplasty by total prosthesis. Hand. 1979, 11: 41–6.
8.
De SmetLSioenWSpaepenDVan RansbeeckH. Total joint arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the thumb basal joint. Acta Orthop Belg. 2004, 70: 19–24.
9.
De SmetLVandenbergheLDegreefI. Long-term outcome of trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI) versus prosthesis arthroplasty for basal joint osteoarthritis of the thumb. Acta Orthop Belg. 2013, 79: 146–9.
10.
EatonRGGlickelSZ. Trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis staging as a rationale for treatment. Hand Clin. 1987, 3: 455–71.
11.
GoubauJFGoorensCKVan HoonackerPBerghsBKerckhoveDScheerlinckT. Clinical and radiological outcomes of the Ivory arthroplasty for trapeziometacarpal joint osteoarthritis with a minimum of 5 years of follow-up: a prospective single-centre cohort study. J Hand Surg Eur. 2013, 38: 866–74.
12.
GoubauJFGoubauLGoorensCK, et al.De Quervain tenosynovitis following trapeziometacarpal ball-and-socket joint replacement. J Wrist Surg. 2015, 4: 35–42.
13.
HansenTBSnerumL. Elektra trapeziometacarpal prosthesis for treatment of osteoarthrosis of the basal joint of the thumb. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg. 2008, 42: 316–9.
14.
Hernández-CortésPPajares-LópezMRobles-MolinaMJGómez-SánchezRToledo-RomeroMADe Torres-UrreaJ. Two-year outcomes of Elektra prosthesis for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: a longitudinal cohort study. J Hand Surg Eur. 2012, 37: 130–7.
15.
KapandjiAI. Cotation clinique de l’opposition et de la contreopposition du pouce. Ann Chir Main. 1986, 5: 67–73.
16.
KlahnANygaardMGvozdenovicRBoeckstynsME. Elektra prosthesis for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: a follow-up of 39 consecutive cases. J Hand Surg Eur. 2012, 37: 605–9.
17.
RegnardPJ. Electra trapeziometacarpal prosthesis: results of the first 100 cases. J Hand Surg Br. 2006, 31: 621–8.
18.
Robles-MolinaMJLópez-CabaFGómez-SánchezRCCárdenas-GrandeEPajares-LópezMHernández-CortésP. Trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition versus a trapeziometacarpal prosthesis for the treatment of thumb basal joint osteoarthritis. Orthopedics. 2017, 40: e681–6.
19.
SemereAVuillermeNCorcellaDForliAMoutetF. Results with the Roseland HAC trapeziometacarpal prosthesis after more than 10 years. Chir Main. 2015, 34: 59–66.
20.
SpaansAJvan MinnenLPWeijnsMEBraakenburgAvan der MolenAB. Retrospective study of a series of 20 Ivory prostheses in the treatment of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. J Wrist Surg. 2016, 5: 131–6.
21.
TangJBGiddinsG. Why and how to report surgeons’ levels of expertise. J Hand Surg Eur. 2016, 41: 365–36.
22.
ToffoliATeissierJ. MAIA trapeziometacarpal joint arthroplasty: clinical and radiological outcomes of 80 patients with more than 6 years of follow-up. J Hand Surg Am. 2017, 42: 838e1–8.
23.
Ulrich-VintherMPuggaardHLangeB. Prospective 1-year follow-up study comparing joint prosthesis with tendon interposition arthroplasty in treatment of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis. J Hand Surg Am. 2008, 33: 1360–77.
24.
VandenbergheLDegreefIDiddenKFiewsSDe SmetL. Long term outcome of trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction/tendon interposition versus thumb basal joint prosthesis. J Hand Surg Eur. 2013, 8: 839–43.
25.
VermeulenGMSlijperHFeitzRHoviusSEMoojenTMSellesRW. Surgical management of primary thumb carpometacarpal osteoarthritis: a systematic review. J Hand Surg Am. 2011, 36: 157–69.
26.
WachtlSWGuggenheimPRSennwaldGR. Radiological course of cemented and uncemented trapeziometacarpal prostheses. Ann Chir Main Memb Super. 1997, 16: 222–8.
27.
WachtlSWGuggenheimPRSennwaldGR. Cemented and non-cemented replacement of the trapeziometacarpal joint. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998, 80: 121–5.
