CERTIFICATE

IMPACT FACTOR 2021

Subject Area

  • Life Sciences / Biology
  • Architecture / Building Management
  • Asian Studies
  • Business & Management
  • Chemistry
  • Computer Science
  • Economics & Finance
  • Engineering / Acoustics
  • Environmental Science
  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Pharmaceutical Sciences
  • General Sciences
  • Materials Science
  • Mathematics
  • Medicine
  • Nanotechnology & Nanoscience
  • Nonlinear Science
  • Chaos & Dynamical Systems
  • Physics
  • Social Sciences & Humanities

Why Us? >>

  • Open Access
  • Peer Reviewed
  • Rapid Publication
  • Life time hosting
  • Free promotion service
  • Free indexing service
  • More citations
  • Search engine friendly

Open versus percutaneous release of a1 pulley in diabetic trigger finger: a randomized control trial

Author: 
Balalis, K., Daskalakis, I., Balalis, M., Kastanis, G., Pantouvaki, A., Sperelakis, I., and Dimitriou, R.
Subject Area: 
Health Sciences
Abstract: 

Stenosing tenosynovitis or trigger finger is a common cause of hand pain and disability.Its prevalence is higher in the diabetic population. The mainstay of treatment consists ofsurgical release of the A1 pulley, either open or percutaneous. The present study attempts to compare the outcomes and complications of conventional open versus percutaneous release, in patients with diabetes mellitus. Material and Methods: In total, 69 patients (69 digits) withchronic diabetes mellitus (38 insulin- dependent and 31 non-insulin dependents, with an average age 48 years old) were treated for trigger finger between 2014-2019). The mean duration of symptoms was 6 months. All patients had failed conservative treatment. The digits were graded accordingto severity of symptomsby using the Quinnel classification. There were 22 grade IIfingers(31,9%), 28 grade III fingers (40,6%), and 19grade IV fingers (27,5%) [8 locked in extension and 11 in flexion]. Thirty-seven patients were treated with the open technique and 32 with the percutaneous technique. Postoperatively, the patients received follow-up visits at 2 weeks and 6 months. Results: The outcome was assessed using the questionnaire of Gilberts and Wereldsma and documenting the complications and satisfaction rate. The overall complication rate was 16.2% in the open technique group and 15.6% in the percutaneous group, with the most commoncomplications in both groups being postoperative pain on the surgical site. In the open technique group, 21 patients were very satisfied patients after treatment (56.76%), 13 were satisfied (35.14%) and 3 patients (8.1%) were unsatisfied with the surgical result. Inthe percutaneous technique group, there were 19 very satisfied patients (59.37%), 11 satisfied (34.37%), and 2 dissatisfied (6.26%). Conclusion: This study highlighted the effectiveness of both techniques; however, the percutaneous technique has the advantages of lower cost and the avoidance of wound complications.

PDF file: 

CALL FOR PAPERS

 

ONLINE PAYPAL PAYMENT

IJMCE RECOMMENDATION

Advantages of IJCR

  • Rapid Publishing
  • Professional publishing practices
  • Indexing in leading database
  • High level of citation
  • High Qualitiy reader base
  • High level author suport

Plagiarism Detection

IJCR is following an instant policy on rejection those received papers with plagiarism rate of more than 20%. So, All of authors and contributors must check their papers before submission to making assurance of following our anti-plagiarism policies.

 

EDITORIAL BOARD

Dr. Swamy KRM
India
Dr. Abdul Hannan A.M.S
Saudi Arabia.
Luai Farhan Zghair
Iraq
Hasan Ali Abed Al-Zu’bi
Jordanian
Fredrick OJIJA
Tanzanian
Firuza M. Tursunkhodjaeva
Uzbekistan
Faraz Ahmed Farooqi
Saudi Arabia
Eric Randy Reyes Politud
Philippines
Elsadig Gasoom FadelAlla Elbashir
Sudan
Eapen, Asha Sarah
United State
Dr.Arun Kumar A
India
Dr. Zafar Iqbal
Pakistan
Dr. SHAHERA S.PATEL
India
Dr. Ruchika Khanna
India
Dr. Recep TAS
Turkey
Dr. Rasha Ali Eldeeb
Egypt
Dr. Pralhad Kanhaiyalal Rahangdale
India
DR. PATRICK D. CERNA
Philippines
Dr. Nicolas Padilla- Raygoza
Mexico
Dr. Mustafa Y. G. Younis
Libiya
Dr. Muhammad shoaib Ahmedani
Saudi Arabia
DR. MUHAMMAD ISMAIL MOHMAND
United State
DR. MAHESH SHIVAJI CHAVAN
India
DR. M. ARUNA
India
Dr. Lim Gee Nee
Malaysia
Dr. Jatinder Pal Singh Chawla
India
DR. IRAM BOKHARI
Pakistan
Dr. FARHAT NAZ RAHMAN
Pakistan
Dr. Devendra kumar Gupta
India
Dr. ASHWANI KUMAR DUBEY
India
Dr. Ali Seidi
Iran
Dr. Achmad Choerudin
Indonesia
Dr Ashok Kumar Verma
India
Thi Mong Diep NGUYEN
France
Dr. Muhammad Akram
Pakistan
Dr. Imran Azad
Oman
Dr. Meenakshi Malik
India
Aseel Hadi Hamzah
Iraq
Anam Bhatti
Malaysia
Md. Amir Hossain
Bangladesh
Ahmet İPEKÇİ
Turkey
Mirzadi Gohari
Iran