MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Denervation as a Treatment for Arthritis in the Hands: A Systematic Review of Current Literature

2020· review· en· W3160302868 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Zhu, Brian Chin, Mohamed Sarraj, Eugene Wang, Emily Dunn, Matthew McRae

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDenervationOsteoarthritisArthroplastySurgeryComplicationArthrodesisSystematic reviewPhysical therapyMEDLINEInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Osteoarthritis is a common degenerative condition that can cause pain and swelling in the joints of the hand. Current surgical treatments include osteotomy, arthroplasty, and arthrodesis. However, each of these interventions is invasive and carry inherent limitations such as high-complication rates, altered joint anatomy, and prolonged recovery times. Joint denervation, which involves selective neurectomy of the articular nerve branches to an osteoarthritic joint, has been proposed as a less invasive treatment option. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate and report the efficacy and safety of surgical joint denervation for osteoarthritis in joints of the hand. METHODS: Embase, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases were searched from January 2000 to March 2019. Studies of adult patients with rheumatoid or osteoarthritis of the hand who underwent joint denervation surgery were included. Two independent reviewers performed the screening process, data abstraction, and quality assessment (MINORS). PRISMA guidelines were followed, and this review was registered with PROSPERO (#125811). RESULTS: Ten studies were included, 9 case series and 1 cohort study, with a total of 211 hand joint denervation in 192 patients. In all studies, joint denervation improved pain and hand function at follow-up (mean = 36.8; range = 3–90 months). Pooled analysis of 3 studies on the first carpometacarpal joint showed a statistically significant (P < 0.001) reduction in pain scores from baseline (mean = 6.61 ± 2.03) to postoperative (mean = 1.69 ± 1.27). The combined complication rate was 18.8% (n = 36/192), and the most commonly reported complication was neuropathic pain or unintended sensory loss (8.8%; n = 17/192). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review suggest that denervation may be an effective and low morbidity procedure for the treatment of osteoarthritis in the joints of the hand. Denervation may serve as a useful tool in the hand surgeon’s armamentarium, particularly for patients failing nonoperative management and looking to pursue less invasive surgical management. Further prospective comparative studies are required to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the outcomes of denervation, especially in comparison to more conventional procedures of osteotomy, arthroplasty, and arthrodesis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.006
Bibliometrics0.0070.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global OpenSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207