Ignite Creation Date:
2026-03-26 @ 3:14 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-03-30 @ 3:18 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT07364695
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2026-03-25
First Post:
2025-12-11
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Early Postoperative Function After Open Versus Ultrasound-Guided Trigger Finger Release
Sponsor:
Massachusetts General Hospital
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Early Postoperative Function After Open Versus Ultrasound-Guided Trigger Finger Release: A Prospective Comparative Cohort Study
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2026-03
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Clinical outcomes after open trigger finger release are excellent. Minimally invasive techiques with ultrasound guidance theoretically offer advantages for faster recovery but this technique has not been compared prospectively with the standard of care (open trigger release). This study aims to prospectively analyze patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing open vs. ultrasound-guided trigger finger release.
Detailed Description:
Trigger finger is initially treated conservatively. Conservative treatment options include modification of activities, painkiller administration, splinting, and corticosteroid injections (1). Open or minimally invasive surgical treatment can be considered if conservative treatment fails. Minimally invasive surgery options consist of ultrasound-guided or blind percutaneous trigger finger release.
Many studies have reported good clinical outcomes after ultrasound-guided trigger finger release, including low rates of catching or locking recurrence rates, high QuickDASH scores and high patient satisfaction (2-4).
Postoperative clinical outcomes of open surgery have been widely compared to percutaneous surgery (5-8). However, the comparison of postoperative results between ultrasound-guided and open trigger finger release has been scarcely reported. Nikolaou et al. reported that ultrasound-guided trigger finger release resulted in a significantly sooner return to normal activities and better patient-reported cosmetic outcomes than open trigger finger release (9). Success rates and mean QuickDASH scores did not differ significantly between these groups in this cohort.
The potential benefits of ultrasound-guided trigger finger release compared to open trigger finger release have yet to be investigated. This study aims to prospectively analyze patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing open vs. ultrasound-guided trigger finger release.
Many studies have reported good clinical outcomes after ultrasound-guided trigger finger release, including low rates of catching or locking recurrence rates, high QuickDASH scores and high patient satisfaction (2-4).
Postoperative clinical outcomes of open surgery have been widely compared to percutaneous surgery (5-8). However, the comparison of postoperative results between ultrasound-guided and open trigger finger release has been scarcely reported. Nikolaou et al. reported that ultrasound-guided trigger finger release resulted in a significantly sooner return to normal activities and better patient-reported cosmetic outcomes than open trigger finger release (9). Success rates and mean QuickDASH scores did not differ significantly between these groups in this cohort.
The potential benefits of ultrasound-guided trigger finger release compared to open trigger finger release have yet to be investigated. This study aims to prospectively analyze patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing open vs. ultrasound-guided trigger finger release.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
True
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
False
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: