ObjectiveThe present study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release using a needle knife.MethodsThe author performed percutaneous A1 pulley release in 84 cadaveric hands fixed with 10% formalin. The cadaveric hands were divided into three groups: 28 hands in each group (group U: ultrasound-guided needle knife pushing group, group N: non-ultrasound-guided needle knife pushing group, group T: classical needle knife operation puncture group). Percutaneous A1 pulley release was performed, the soft tissue was dissected layer by layer, and the relevant anatomical data were measured.ResultsThe injured cases were as follows: group U, 29 (20.7%); group N, 36 (25.7%); and group T, 28 (20.0%). There is no significant difference between different tissue injury types in different intervention methods. The missed release cases were as follows: group U, 8 (5.7%); group N, 4 (2.9%); and group T, 13 (9.3%). The percentage of released A1 pulley were as follows: group U, 71.4% ± 30.7%; group N, 66.0% ± 20.3%; and group T, 61.0% ± 30.4%. The percentage of released A1 pulley of the three groups were compared: group U > group N > group T, and there was statistical difference between the three groups. The full release rates of the three groups were compared: group U(31.4%) > group N(15.7%) > group T(13.6%), and there were significant difference in the full release of A1 pulley between group U and group T, group N.ConclusionBased on the cadaver specimen, the length and percentage of released A1 pulley is longer by ultrasound-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release using a needle-knife. and there was no statistical difference in the injury rate between the three techniques.Type of Study and Clinical RelevanceClinical anatomic study. To test the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous A1 pulley release using a needle knife in cadaveric hands, and provide an anatomically based support in clinic.

Background:Trigger finger is thought to be caused by aseptic inflammation of the A1 pulley and subsequent thickening and narrowing of the fibrous sheath. Acupotomy has been an important treatment for trigger finger. But an updated systematic review about this issue has not yet been released. This systematic review protocol is aimed at providing a higher quality method used to evaluate the efficacy and safety of acupotomy treatment for trigger finger.Methods:The following databases will be searched from the study inception to July 2019: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wan-Fang Data, and Chinese Biomedical Literature Database. All English or Chinese randomized controlled trials related to acupotomy for trigger finger will be included. Two reviewers will independently perform the processes of study inclusion, data extraction, and quality assessment. The primary outcome will be assessed by improvement of the pain symptoms and finger activity. Secondary outcomes will be assessed through Safety assessment. Meta-analysis will be completed by RevMan V.5.3 software.Results:This systematic review will provide an assessment of the current state of acupotomy for trigger finger, aiming to show the efficacy and safety of treatment.Conclusion:This systematic review will re-evaluate a higher-quality systematic review to obtain a relatively convincing conclusion that finds acupotomy to be a better choice for trigger finger patients.PROSPERO registration number:CRD42018118663

No abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine the safety and accuracy of ultrasound-guided acupotomy percutaneous loosening of the transverse carpal ligament.MethodsThe 100 upper limb specimens were equally divided into the ultrasound-guided acupotomy group (U) and the nonultrasound-guided acupotomy group (N). For the U group, we simulated ultrasound-guided acupotomy loosening of the transverse carpal ligament in a human specimen, and for the N group, we performed the loosening of the transverse carpal ligament through the same approach under nonultrasound-guided conditions. The safety and accuracy of the two methods were compared through measurement.ResultsIn the ultrasound-guided group, the injury rate of nerves, blood vessels and tendons caused by needle-knife release was 0%. In the non-ultrasound-guided group, the rate of nerve, blood vessel and tendon damage was 6 percent, 12 percent and 20 percent, respectively. χ2 test (Fisher exact test) was performed for the nerve and blood vessel damage rates in the two groups (PN > 0.05, PA < 0.05), the difference in nerve damage rates was not statistically significant, but the difference in blood vessel damage rates was statistically significant. Pearson's χ2 test was performed on the tendon injury rates of the two groups (PF < 0.05), and the difference was statistically significant. In the ultrasound-guided group, the proportion of acupotomy marks greater than or equal to half of the width of the transverse carpal ligament was 86%, and the non-ultrasound-guided group was 36%. The accuracy of the two surgical methods was tested by Pearson's χ2 test (PL < 0.05), and the difference was statistically significant. According to the measurement, the ultrasound-guided acupotomy technology had high safety and accuracy.ConclusionIn this study, we designed a new method for cutting the transverse carpal ligament under ultrasound guidance, which is different from surgery. These results indicate that this is a safe and accurate method of interventional treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome.

Background:Acupotomy is a miniature surgery instrument. It can cut and detach the abnormal, cicatricial, and contractured tissues by causing only microtrauma. Acupotomy has been widely used clinically with a satisfactory efficacy. With the development of ultrasound technology, ultrasound-guided acupotomy has shown great value in clinical practice. But it is not yet clear that ultrasound-guided acupotomy is very effective and safe. Therefore, it is important to re-evaluate the available evidence to reach a relatively convincing conclusion that acupotomy by ultrasound-guided technique is a better choice than traditional acupotomy. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a method for evaluating the effectiveness and safety of acupotomy by ultrasound-guided technique.Methods:This systematic review will be performed by searching relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) without any language or publication status restriction from inception to December 2019 by 2 researchers in nine databases (PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Chinese literature databases, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database [CBM], China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], China Science and Journal Database [CSJD], and Wanfang Database). All RCTs evaluating acupotomy by the ultrasound-guided technique will be included in this study. Visual analog scale (VAS) and change of symptom will be assessed as the primary outcomes. The change in the ultrasound image, safety and adverse events, and acceptability will be assessed as secondary outcomes. The selection of study, data collection and analysis, and assessment of the study quality will be completed independently by 2 researchers. RevMan v.5.3 will be used for meta-analysis if no significant heterogeneity is detected. Continuous outcomes will be presented as the mean difference (MD) or standardized MD, while dichotomous data will be expressed as the relative risk.Results:This study will provide a high-quality synthesis of QL and AR to assess the effectiveness and safety of acupotomy by ultrasound-guided technique.Conclusion:This systematic review will provide evidence to judge whether acupotomy by ultrasound-guided technique is an effective the efficacy and safety intervention.PROSPERO registration number:CRD42018109070.