ABSTRACT
No study has compared the QuickDASH score after Swanson implant arthroplasty performed by dorsal versus volar approaches. This study compared the outcomes of PIP arthroplasties through a volar approach as described by Schneider versus a dorsal approach as described by Chamay by determining the QuickDASH score, pain and range of motion. Our series included 21 Swanson implant arthroplasty cases in 17 patients aged 62 years on average, among which 12 were females. A volar approach was performed in 9 cases (group I) and a dorsal approach was performed in 12 cases (group II). The difference between the average QuickDASH score preoperatively and at the last follow-up was strong (group I: -16.584; group II: -1.444), the difference between the average pain level preoperatively and at the last follow up was very strong (group I: -2.098; group II: -4.506), the difference in average PIP extension was not different from 0 (group: I -5.805; group II: -11.332), the difference in average PIP flexion was very strong (group I: -2.716; group II: -2.007). There were four recurrences of swan neck deformity (3 in group, 1 in group II) and one implant fracture in each group. For Swanson implant arthroplasty, the volar approach leads to better QuickDASH scores and PIP flexion compared to the dorsal approach. The volar approach did not improve PIP extension, or pain, and did not lead to dysesthesia.
