International Orthopaedics

, Volume 43, Issue 3, pp 647–651 | Cite as

Suspension arthroplasty versus interposition arthroplasty in the treatment of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: a clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study

  • Matteo Guzzini
  • Dario Perugia
  • Lorenzo ProiettiEmail author
  • Raffaele Iorio
  • Daniele Mazza
  • Vincenzo Masi
  • Andrea Ferretti
Original Paper



Biological arthroplasties are the most used surgical techniques, for the treatment of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis; all of them provide the reconstruction of trapeziometacarpal joint by a tendon graft. The aim of the study is to compare two surgical techniques: interposition arthroplasty and suspension arthroplasty at 12-month follow-up in order to evaluate the clinical and radiographic results.


Sixty-seven patients surgically treated for basal thumb osteoarthritis were divided into two groups: 36 patients, (8 M; 27 F) (39 hands), treated with interposition arthroplasty are included in group A and 31 patients, (6 M; 25 F) (34 hands), treated with suspension are included in group B. Both groups were radiographically evaluated with X-ray and MRI at 12 months and clinically evaluated with DASH score, VAS, Grind test, hand grip tests, Kapandji test and ROM before surgery and at final follow-up.


At final follow-up about Kapandji test, in group A, 31 hands (79.4%) presented Kapandji score of 10 and eight hands (20.6%), a Kapandji score of 8. In group B, six hands (17.6%) reported a Kapandji score of 8 and 28 patients (82.4%), a Kapandji score of 10 (p < 0.05). Regarding the radial abduction, patients of group A recovered on average 79.5° of abduction and in group B recovered on average 78°. About DASH score and VAS score, group B shows better results. Mean decalage was 2.3 mm in group A and 0 mm in group B. Jamar dynamometer shows statistically better results for group B in all tests (hand grip test, pulp pinch and key pinch test).


Suspension arthroplasty seems to guarantee better outcomes in terms of pain reduction, clinical score and recovery of grip strength. Moreover, it seem to be associated with better results at MRI like absence of I ray decalage and minor scaphoid subchondral oedema at final follow-up.


Osteoarthritis Surgical techniques Magnetic resonance imaging 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Pereira D, Peleteiro B, Araújo J, Branco J, Santos RA, Ramos E (2011) The effect of osteoarthritis definition on prevalence and incidence estimates: a systematic review. Osteoarthr Cartil 19:1270–1285CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ladd AL, Weiss AP, Crisco JJ et al (2013) The thumb carpometacarpal joint: anatomy, hormones and biomechanics. Instr Course Lect 62:165–179PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gehrmann SV, Tang J, Li ZM, Goitz RJ, Windolf J, Kaufmann RA (2010) Motion deficit of the thumb in CMC joint arthritis. J Hand Surg 35(53):1449–1453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kjeken I, Dagfinrud H, Slatkowsky-Christensen B et al (2005) Activity limitations and participation restrictions in women with hand osteoarthritis: patients’ descriptions and associations between dimensions of functioning. Ann Rheum Dis 64:1633–1638CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dominick KL, Jordan JM, Renner JB, Kraus VB (2005) Relationship of radiographic and clinical variables to pinch and grip strength among individuals with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 52:1424–1430CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Armstrong AL, Hunter JB, Davis TR (1994) The prevalence of degenerative arthritis of the base of the thumb in post-menopausal women. J Hand Surg Br 19:340–341CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang Y, Niu J, Kelly-Hayes M, Chaisson CE, Aliabadi P, Felson DT (2002) Prevalence of symptomatic hand osteoarthritis and its impact on functional status among the elderly: the Framingham study. Am J Epidemiol 156:1021–1027CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moriatis Wolf J, Turkiewicz A, Atroshi I, Englund M (2014) Prevalence of doctor-diagnosed thumb carpometacarpal joint osteoarthritis: an analysis of Swedish health care. Arthritis Care Res 66:961–965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hamasaki T, Lalonde L, Harris P et al (2015 Oct 13) Efficacy of treatments and pain management for trapeziometacarpal (thumb base) osteoarthritis: protocol for a systematic review. BMJ Open 5(10):e008904. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Valdes K, von der Heyde R (2012) An exercise program for carpometacarpal osteoarthritis based on biomechanical principles. J Hand Ther 25:251–262 quiz 263. 67CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Van Heest AE, Kallemeier P (2008) Thumb carpal metacarpal arthritis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16:140–151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    O’Brien VH, McGaha JL (2014) Current practice patterns in conservative thumb CMC joint care: survey results. J Hand Ther 27:14–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bufalini C, Perugia D (2007 Nov) Distraction arthroplasty of the trapeziometacarpal joint. J Hand Surg Am 32(9):1443–1446CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robinson D, Aghasi M, Halperin N (1991) Abductor pollicis longus tendon arthroplasty of the trapezio-metacarpal joint: surgical technique and results. J Hand Surg Am 16A:504–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Burton RI (1986) Surgical management of basal joint arthritis of the thumb. Part II. Ligament reconstruction with tendon interposition arthroplasty. J Hand Surg Am 11A:324–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Altissimi M, Brachiroli L, Azzarà A, Berloco M (2008) Trapeziectomy and suspension ligamentoplasy in the treatment of basal thumb osteoarthritis: results from 2 to 12 years. Rivista di chirurgia della mano 45:48–53Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weilby A (1988) A tendon interposition arthroplasty of the first carpo-metacarpal joint. J Hand Surg 13B:423–425Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hofammann DY, Ferlic DC, Clayton ML (1987) Arthroplasty of the basal joint of the thumb using a silicone prosthesis: long term follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg 69A:993–997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pellegrini VD, Burton RI (1986) Surgical management of basal joint arthritis of the thumb, part I: long term results of silicone implant arthroplasty. J Hand Surg 309–324Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spekreijse KR, Selles RW, Kedilioglu MA et al (2016) Trapeziometacarpal arthrodesis or trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction in primary trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: a 5-year follow-up. J Hand Surg Am 41(9):910–916. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Froimson AI (1970) Tendon arthroplasty of the trapezio-metacarpal joint. Clin Orthop 70:191–199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Swanson AB, Swanson GG (1987) Reconstruction of the thumb basal joints; development and current status of implant techniques. Clin Orthop 220:68–85Google Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matteo Guzzini
    • 1
  • Dario Perugia
    • 1
  • Lorenzo Proietti
    • 1
    Email author
  • Raffaele Iorio
    • 1
  • Daniele Mazza
    • 1
  • Vincenzo Masi
    • 1
  • Andrea Ferretti
    • 1
  1. 1.Sant’andrea Hospital, Traumatology Sports Center “Kilk Kilgour”“La Sapienza” UniversityRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations