Minimally Invasive Treatment of Dupuytren: Collagenase Versus PNF

• Published in: Hand (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2016-09, Vol.11 (1_suppl), p.82S-82S
• Main Authors: Baur, Eva-Maria, Zimmermann, Robert, Muller, Verena, Mair, Waltraud
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 1558-9447; 1558-9455
• DOI: 10.1177/1558944716660555ey

Objective / Hypothesis: At our clinic of plastic, reconstructive and aesthetic surgery we are looking for the results after two minimally invasive treatments for Dupuytren disease. With the upcoming possible treatment with collagenase the l”old fashioned” therapy with percutaneous needle fasciotomy (PNF) becomes a big revival. The purpose of the non-randomized prospective study was to Iook for differences after 12, 18 and 24 months regarding the two possible treatments. Methods: ln our clinic we propose and perform both treatments, the decision is taken together with the patient. Since more than 2 years we follow-up the patients regarding the results after 3 weeks, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24 months; regarding function, scars, and recurrence (worsening of contracture in comparison to 3 weeks postop at least for 20°). Patients treated with Xiapex: 12 months postop. - 25 patients; 18 months postop. - 16 patients; 24 months postop. -13 patients. PNF: 12 months postop. - 30 patients; 18 months postop. - 19 patients; 24 months postop. - 18 patients. Post I { operative” treatment is night-splinting for 6 weeks at least. Results: We report our results of both groups. We cannot find a real difference between both groups. But the follow-up is only 24 months for the moment. We report also the pros and cons of the two different treatment options. Conclusions: Both minimal invasive treatment options are very similar in results and complications with a slight advantage for the percutaneous needle fasciotomy. But a longer follow up and a bigger study is required.