Total joint arthroplasty versus resection-interposition arthroplasty for thumb carpometacarpal arthritis: a randomized controlled trial

Background and purpose - Thumb carpometacarpal (TCMC) osteoarthritis is a common condition that causes pain and functional limitations. We compared the outcomes of 2 surgical procedures for TCMC osteoarthritis, the Epping resection-suspension arthroplasty and the double-mobility TCMC prosthesis, and focused on pain relief, functional out-comes, and patient quality of life. Patients and methods - Over a 7-year period a ran-domized controlled trial including 183 cases of TCMC osteo-arthritis was conducted comparing a double mobility TCMC prosthesis (Moovis, Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI, USA) with the Epping resection-suspension arthroplasty. Pre-and postoper-ative examinations included the range of motion (ROM), SF -McGill score, visual analogue scale (VAS), the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (DASH), and the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS). Results - At the 6-week postoperative follow-up, sig-nificant differences were found in VAS: Epping median 4.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 2.0-5.0) vs. TCMC prosthesis 2.0 (IQR 0.25-4.0), p = 0.03, effect size (area under the curve [AUC]) 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.73), in DASH score: Epping 61 (IQR 43-75) vs. TCMC prosthesis 45 (IQR 29-57), p < 0.001, AUC 0.69 (CI 0.61- 0.78), and in radial abduction: Epping 55 (IQR 50-60) vs. TCMC pros-thesis 62 (IQR 60-70), p = 0.001, AUC 0.70 (CI 0.61-0.79). No significant group differences were found at the 6-and 12-months follow-up. During the follow-up period, 3 of 82 prostheses had to be revised but there was no revision in the Epping group. Conclusion - The double mobility TCMC prosthesis had superior outcomes compared with the Epping procedure at 6 weeks; however, there were no significant differences in outcomes at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. The implant survival rate of 96% after 12 months was acceptable.