| Metacarpophalangeal Arthroplasty in Rheumatoid Arthritis Philip E. Blazar MD
 DEPARTMENT OF ORTHOPAEDICS, BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL, BOSTON MA
 
 Introduction Metacarpophalangeal (MP) arthroplasty is the most common
									and successful joint replacement surgery of the hand. This
									paper will briefly review the anatomy of the MP joint, and the
									indications, technique, results and complications of MP arthroplasty.
									Although MP implants are occasionally performed for
									post-traumatic or osteoarthritic joints, the literature focuses
									on patients with rheumatoid or other inflammatory arthritides.
									These patients can anticipate deformity correction, improved
									function and highly effective pain relief. The hand is the primary mode of interaction with our
									environment. Therefore, even minor alterations of hand and
									wrist function resulting from rheumatoid arthritis (RA) affect
									the ability to function occupationally, recreationally and in
									activities of daily life. A multidisciplinary approach involving
									the rheumatologist, hand surgeon, and hand therapist is advisable
									in caring for these patients. Because delays in surgical
									and non-surgical treatment may lead to further disease progression,
									joint destruction and loss of function, early intervention is
									imperative. The initial evaluation and subsequent treatment of
									each patient's problem are challenging because of the anatomic
									complexities of the hand and wrist. However, a strong understanding
									of the relevant anatomy and a systematic approach
									to patient evaluation allow a logical plan of treatment to be
									generated. Anatomy The normal MP joint is a diarthodial, condylar-type joint.
									The metacarpal head has a greater surface area than the base
									of the proximal phalanx. The articular surface of the head is
									convex and has a wider volar surface. The asymmetry of this
									surface accounts for the tightening of the collateral ligaments
									when the joint is brought into flexion. This asymmetry also
									results in a mobile center of rotation to the MP joint, which
									moves volarly with flexion. The normal synovial membrane
									of the MP joint is attached around the margins of the articular
									cartilage with volar and dorsal capsular reflections. The largest
									synovial fold is found on the dorsal neck of the metacarpal10. The arc of motion of the normal MP joint is described as
									neutral to 90 degrees of flexion, although many individuals will
									demonstrate variable degrees of hyperextension. Radial and
									ulnar deviation is maximized in extension and is decreased with
									flexion and the associated tightening of the collateral ligaments.
									The MP joint deviates slightly in the ulnar direction with flexion
									of the digits. The joint is stabilized by ligamentous structures. The
									collateral ligaments originate on the dorsal aspect of the
									metacarpal head - neck junction and insert on the volar aspect
									of the proximal phalanx. The collaterals are the primary stabilizers
									against varus-valgus and dorsal-palmar stresses. The
									volar plate has a membranous attachment on the neck of the
									metacarpal and a more fibrous attachment on the base of the
									proximal phalanx; it acts as the primary stabilizer against
									hyperextension. The flexor tendon sheath, the intermetacarpal
									ligaments and the sagittal bands of the extensor hood attach to
									the volar plate. The accessory collateral ligaments are located
									volar to the collateral ligaments and insert into the volar plate;
									they act as stabilizers of the volar plate, as well as secondary
									stabilizers against varus-valgus stress. The interossei and lumbrical muscles exert a flexion force
									on the MP joint through their attachments into the extensor
									hood and proximal phalanx. The sagittal bands aid in extension
									of the MP joint through their insertion into the volar plate, as
									well as stabilizing the extensor tendons over the joint itself. The
									long flexor tendons can exert a flexion moment on the MP joint
									but their insertions on the distal and middle phalanges require
									this to occur after interphalangeal joint flexion. Pathophysiology of Rheumatoid MP Joints The MP joint is the most common site of involvement in
									RA. Destruction of the MP joint in RA begins with a proliferative
									synovitis and progressively leads to a volarly subluxated
									proximal phalanx with ulnar deviation and destruction of the
									articular cartilage. MP joint deformities in RA have been extensively
									described. Characteristic changes occur in the articular
									surface, soft tissue stabilizing structures and bony supports10,16. The primary causative factor producing the MP joint deformities
									characteristic of RA remains controversial. Zancolli and
									others have proposed a dynamic deformity, which exists prior
									to articular destruction22. Inflammation of the carpometacarpal
									joints exaggerates the spread of the metacarpals and
									the tendency for the MP joints to move into ulnar deviation
									with flexion. The supination deformity of the carpus leads to a
									radial deviation of the metacarpals. The resulting imbalance of
									forces on the extensor tendons results in their subluxation off
									the metacarpal head. This is facilitated by synovial infiltration
									along the collateral ligaments and at their attachments, which
									results in stretching out of the radial ligaments, producing
									further ulnar deviation and subluxation. The synovial proliferation
									within the joint contributes to attenuation of the radial
									sagittal bands and facilitates migration of the extensor tendons10,16. The theory of a dynamic deformity preceding the development
									of MP articular changes is not universally accepted,
									and some authors feel that changes in the articular surface
									are primary. The initial changes seen in articular cartilage
									are softening and a loss of normal translucent appearance. A
									gradual progression to fibrillation and pitting of the surface of
									the metacarpal head occurs, followed by erosions and exposed
									bone. Bony erosions correspond to areas of synovial reflection.
									Volar erosions tend to be shallower than dorsal ones. Erosions
									in any area have the potential to penetrate through the cortical
									bone, although this is less common volarly. In advanced cases,
									the erosions can coalesce circumferentially around the metacarpal
									neck. Erosions of the proximal phalanx occur later in the
									disease and tend to involve a circumferential margin around
									the base of the phalanx10. The capsular laxity of the MP joints that allows radial-ulnar
									deviation and flexion-extension motion makes subluxation/
									dislocation common sequelae of synovitis. When capsular laxity
									is combined with extensor tendon subluxation, joint deformity
									progressively leads to a fixed, volarly subluxated proximal
									phalanx with ulnar deviation. Attempts at finger extension
									lead to ulnar deviation. Additional ulnar deviation forces come
									from deformity of the wrist and tenosynovitis of the flexor
									tendons resulting in ulnar displacement of the flexors. With
									progressive subluxation the radial sided structures stretch and
									the ulnar ligaments and intrinsic muscles shorten. The fixed
									flexion deformities result in the inability to open the hand to
									grasp large objects and difficulty in fine manipulation of objects
									between the index and long fingers and the thumb.
									 Nalebuff and Millender have classified deformity of the MP
									joint in RA11. Stage I disease is characterized by MP synovitis
									with the ability to fully extend the joint, and little ulnar
									deviation or articular changes. Patients are managed medically
									for the synovitis, with splinting and/or corticosteroid injections
									for symptomatic relief. Night splints that hold the MP
									joints in extension and correct ulnar deviation are frequently
									prescribed. Stage II is marked by the development of early erosions.
									Pain is generally the chief complaint. The extensor tendons
									show a tendency to move towards the web spaces. An extensor
									lag commonly exists, but flexion is well preserved. Clinical
									intervention focuses on maximizing medical management.
									Surgical intervention is infrequently performed, but could
									include synovectomy and soft tissue balancing. Synovectomy
									is not thought to alter the long-term prognosis of the disease
									but is widely accepted for alleviating local symptoms. Prior
									to undertaking soft tissue realignment, the surgeon must
									consider the adjacent joints and the mechanical effects on the
									MP. The incision for a Stage II procedure is the same as that
									utilized for arthroplasty should further surgery be necessary.
									Some surgeons consider crossed intrinsic transfers to the radial
									lateral band for significant ulnar deviation. Stage III disease is characterized by advancing joint
									destruction and increasing deformity. These patients frequently
									have substantial PIP disease. The surgical decision
									is whether arthroplasty or tendon centralization and synovectomy
									is appropriate. The patient's level of pain and the function
									of the affected hand typically guide this decision. Stage IV disease is marked by fixed subluxation and
									destruction as seen on radiographs. By this stage, silicone
									implants are widely considered the treatment of choice, and
									decision-making focuses on the options available for the other
									joints. However, in a young patient with a functional range
									of motion of the MP joint (an active arc of motion of 60 to
									70 degrees), the surgeon must determine whether surgical
									intervention is indicated, as there is unlikely to be functional
									improvement. Examination of the wrist and PIP joints must be
									performed, as changes in these areas are more common with
									advanced disease and may need to be surgically addressed prior
									to performing an MP arthroplasty3,16. Patients Evaluation  Evaluation of the rheumatoid patient with involvement
									of the MP joints requires an assessment of the global function
									of the extremity and in particular any deformities of adjacent
									joints. Adjacent joint deformity and subsequent progression
									may contribute to the ultimate success or failure of any procedure
									performed in the MP joints. Progressive deformity of
									the wrist, in particular, may predispose MP arthroplasty to early
									recurrent ulnar deviation. A systematic framework, which
									divides the hand and wrist into four anatomic regions, should
									be followed in examining a deformed hand and wrist.
									First, the wrist should be evaluated for localized areas of pain, tenderness
									and swelling indicative of synovitis or tenosynovitis. Changes
									in range of motion over time are important when evaluating disease
									progression. Next, the thumb joints--carpometacarpal (CMC),
									metacarpophalangeal (MP), and interphalangeal (IP)-- are examined.
									Deformity and active and passive ranges of motion are all checked.
									Third, the index through small fingers are evaluated for swelling,
									deformity and range of motion at the MP joint. Lastly, the proximal
									interphalangeal (PIP) and distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints are
									assessed for articular destruction and tendon imbalance. (Figure 1)
 Treatment Options Rest, exercise, splinting and corticosteroid injections play a
									critical role during early and late stages of the disease. Inflamed,
									painful joints will commonly respond to rest to diminish acute
									synovitis. Diseased joints require use to prevent worsening
									contractures, as active motion is needed to maintain tendon
									gliding and muscle tone. In general, short frequent periods of
									exercise are preferable to longer periods that have the potential
									to aggravate existing inflammation. A hand therapist is invaluable
									to achieve the appropriate balance and monitor activity. Patients are commonly treated with resting and dynamic
									splints. Resting splints are effective in relieving pain yet allow
									many functional activities. Dynamic splints provide slow, constant
									stretching to help alleviate deformity. Corticosteroid injections
									are utilized to lessen synovitis and tenosynovitis and are
									commonly used for carpal tunnel syndrome, extensor tenosynovitis
									and for individual joints refractory to medical treatment.
									While serious complications are uncommon, tendon ruptures
									may be caused by frequent or repeated steroid administration.
									Thus, steroid injections should be limited to two or three times
									annually. Any joint or tendon sheath in the hand with synovitis
									prompting repeated steroid injection may benefit from surgical
									intervention. The history of MP joint replacement is heavily dependent
									upon the work of Albert Swanson, which was first reported in
									196617. The silicone rubber implants used in MP arthroplasty
									differ in their fixation, articulation and motion from
									the prostheses commonly used in larger joints. The role of the
									implant, according to Swanson, is not to function as a true
									prosthesis, but to serve as a spacer to maintain the joint in
									alignment after a resection arthroplasty is performed18. The
									implant provides enough stability in the early post-operative
									period to mobilize the joint. However, the contribution of the
									implant to joint motion is debated. These prostheses have been
									described as "dynamic spacers18." The implant promotes the
									development of a fibrous capsule, adapted to a functional range
									of motion determined by the post-operative mobilization.
									Swanson has termed the development of this fibrous capsule
									the "encapsulation process18." Silastic MP implants are inserted without an attempt to
									achieve rigid fixation. The encapsulation process itself is the
									definitive fixation of the implant. A small amount of pistoning
									of the intramedullary stem of the implant occurs3. Attempts
									at more rigid fixation of these implants have resulted in early
									fracture and clinical failures. The pistoning or gliding of the
									implant within the medullary canal adds to the range of motion
									achieved by the arthroplasty, in addition to dispersing the forces
									of motion along the implant-bone interface16,18. Surgical Technique The technique for MP arthroplasty has been extensively
									described2,4,5,8,18. A dorsal transverse incision is used at
									the level of metacarpal head-neck junction. The dorsal veins
									are preserved to the extent possible. The extensor mechanism
									is exposed and a longitudinal incision is made in the
									extensor hood. Swanson and most other authors make this
									incision through the attenuated ulnar sagital band, although
									Beckenbaugh and Lindscheid recommend preserving the ulnar
									hood if possible and incising the radial aspect of the extensor
									mechanism3,18. The capsule is then incised longitudinally
									and the neck of the metacarpal is exposed. A soft tissue release
									is necessary to relocate the phalanx and to allow preparation
									of the bony structures for insertion of the component. The
									collateral ligaments are released at their origin and the contracted
									ulnar intrinsics, including the abductor digiti minimi,
									are released. The flexor digiti minimi is preserved, as the small
									finger typically has the most difficulty achieving active flexion
									post-operatively. Some surgeons prefer not to release the ulnar
									intrinsic to the index finger in an attempt to preserve the function
									of the first palmar interosseous muscle for pulp to pulp pinch. The metacarpal head is then removed along with capsular
									attachments after transecting the neck with a saw, rongeur or
									drill. The level of resection is just distal to the origin of the
									now reflected collateral ligaments. Hypertrophic synovium
									within the joint capsule is then removed3,18. Preparation
									of the medullary canal of the metacarpal is performed with
									hand reamers. Swanson uses a specially designed burr with a
									smooth tip to lessen the chance of cortical perforation. There
									is evidence that over-reaming of the canal is associated with
									periprosthetic bone loss post-operatively; therefore, reaming is
									minimized in both the metacarpal and proximal phalanx. After
									reaming, a trial prosthesis is selected. An effort is made to fit
									the largest size without applying undue force. An appropriately
									sized prosthesis should fit snugly while the transverse midportion
									of the implant rests against the cut surface of the bone18. The proximal phalanx is prepared by making a perforation
									in the subchondral bone in line with the center of the medullary
									canal. The hole is enlarged to accept a rectangular prosthesis
									with a rasp or burr. The index finger may be held in a
									slightly supinated position while rasping to improve tip pinch.
									After preparation and reaming of the selected, trial prostheses
									are once again inserted to ensure proper fit. With placement of
									a properly sized trial, no subluxation of the joint should occurr
									and the implant should fit snugly into both canals18. To improve the durability of the implants, some authors
									have suggested the use of implants with titanium grommets.
									In theory, the titanium protects from silastic wear. However,
									there is little clinical data documenting any benefit, and the
									data from animal experiments is inconclusive13. Some
									surgeons reserve the use of grommets for cases with extensive
									erosion of the dorsal aspect of the proximal phalanx to achieve
									a more stable construct.  Prior to insertion of the actual prosthesis, soft tissue
									reconstruction of the radial ligament complex must be considered.
									This is accomplished with the proper collateral ligament,
									unless it is severely attenuated. It is reattached with nonabsorbable
									suture through holes in the metacarpal neck and
									imbricated as necessary. If the collateral ligament is deficient,
									an alternative radial ligamentous reconstruction has been
									described with the volar capsule and half of the volar
									plate attached to the origin of the collateral ligament3,16,18. 
									Kirschenbaum and Schneider have described good long-term results 
									without a radial reconstruction. (Figure 4)
 The bony surfaces are then irrigated and prepared
									for implantation. A socalled "no-touch" technique
									is used with smooth forceps so as not to injure the surface
									of the silicone rubber, as implant fracture has been
									related to propagation of surface defects. The implant
									is first inserted into the metacarpal and then with flexion and
									distraction the distal end is placed into the phalanx. The radial
									reconstruction is tied down after placement of the implant, and
									the capsule is closed. The extensor tendon is centralized and
									the radial sagittal bands are reefed. The skin is closed with
									interrupted sutures over a subcutaneous drain. A bulky dressing
									is applied and the hand is splinted with the MP joints in
									extension to protect the soft tissue reconstruction16,18. Rehabilitation The traditional post-operative therapy protocol begins
									within one week of surgery. The patient is fitted with a dynamic
									splint holding the MP joints in extension and neutral to radial
									deviation. A static resting splint is also fabricated. The patient
									is encouraged to actively flex the MP joints in a controlled fashion
									to protect the extensor realignment and prevent prosthetic
									dislocation. The patient is weaned from the dynamic splint at
									six weeks post-operatively but static splinting is continued at
									night for three to four months20. An alternative postoperative protocol has recently been
									proposed14. The patients are placed in a hand-based cast
									with the MP joints in extension and 10-15 degrees of radial
									deviation. The wrist and distal joints are left free. The cast is
									removed after 5 weeks and patients are begun in a therapy program
									of active and passive motion with a static nighttime splint
									for an additional six weeks. This protocol has demonstrated
									comparable results in one large series from a single surgeon
									and offers a much simpler rehabilitation protocol for patients
									and therapists. Results and Complications The silastic implants used in MP arthroplasty function
									differently than those used in the more common large joint
									replacements. MP silastic arthroplasties are not fixed to the
									skeleton and patients have motion between the implant and the
									bones as well as within the implant. Attempts at engineering
									MP arthroplasties similar to larger joint replacements continue,
									but they are not widely accepted at this time. The literature on
									these MP total joint replacements is limited and demonstrates
									results that are not convincingly superior to silastic arthropasty
									for most patients with RA. In addition, dislocation of these less
									constrained implants can occur as a result of the extensive soft
									tissue attenuation/destruction in RA. The results after MP silastic arthroplasty are well-documented.
									Overall, function is substantially improved in appropriately
									selected patients. The variables reported in the literature
									include range of motion, ulnar deviation, pain relief and
									patient satisfaction. Realistic expectations are important, as
									the arthroplasties are not expected to achieve a full range of MP
									motion. Patients with substantial extensor lag or ulnar deviation
									preoperatively will only have a small increase in the arc of
									motion, but the arc will be in a more functional position. Key
									and tip pinch will also be improved as the index is brought over
									into a radial position. Reported post-operative arcs of motion
									vary from 38 to 60 degrees1,2,4,5,7,8,18. Extension lags also
									vary from 9 to 22 degrees1,2,4,5,7,8,18. Loss of motion over
									time also may occur, as Bierber reported a loss of 12 degrees of
									active motion at an average of 5 years of follow-up4. Ulnar deviation is reliably corrected, although there is a
									tendency for some ulnar drift to recur with long-term followup.
									The correction of deformity has been documented as one of
									the major contributors to patients' subjective sense of improvement.
									Correction within a few degrees of neutral is reported in
									most series. Recurrent ulnar drift has been reported in up to
									43% of patients, however, the recurrent deformities reported is
									less than 20-30 degrees in most series1,2,4,5,7,8,18.  Pain relief is inconsistently documented in follow-up
									studies of MP arthroplasty, although clinical experience suggests
									that it is consistent. Kirschenbaum reported that of 144
									arthroplasties in 36 hands, none complained of pain. Bieber
									reported that only 20% of patients in their series reported pain
									as a pre-operative concern4,8. Beckenbaugh reported recurrence
									of pain in 2 percent of patients at an average follow-up of
									32 months2. Patient satisfaction with the procedure is generally
									high, with the majority of patients in most series reporting
									they would undergo the procedure again.
 The patient's subjective appraisal of outcome has been
									investigated for its relationship to deformity, strength, range of
									motion, pain relief and other traditional parameters of success.
									Notably, the strongest determinant of patient satisfaction was
									with appearance and correction of deformity. Pain relief was
									also found to be important, but the other traditionally examined
									parameters (motion, strength etc.) were not found to have a
									statistical correlation9. (Figure 2) Silicone rubber MP joint implants generally have a low
									rate of complications1,2,4,5,7,18. Several other types of MP
									prostheses have a higher rate of long-term complications1.
									Foliart has published an extensive review of the literature on
									complications of Swanson finger joint implants7. The most
									frequently reported complication was extensive change in the
									bone surrounding the implant. This complication was found
									in 4% of silicone rubber implants7. Swanson has extensively
									studied the changes in bone morphology19. Metacarpal midshaft
									cortical bone consistently decreased post-operatively in
									this study, and the length of metacarpals with implants in place
									decreased by an average of 9%19. Bones remodeling also
									resulted in thickening of the bony surfaces at the metacarpal
									and phalangeal metaphysis while maintaining the shape of the
									cut end of the metacarpal19.  Foliart found implant fracture in 2% of reported cases7. 
									However, the rate of implant fracture varies form 0%4 to
									38%2 and may depend on how extensively the investigator
									looks for radiographic evidence of fracture1,2,4,5,8,18. Many
									authors report that the majority of patients with fractured
									implants have acceptable function and do not require revision.
									The low morbidity of fractured prosthesis has been related to
									the function of the implant as a spacer rather than as an articulated
									prosthesis1,2,4,5,8,18. Several changes have been made
									in the implants to address this problem. The originally used
									silicone rubber 372 has been replaced by "high performance"
									(HP) silicone rubber. In vitro investigation demonstrates
									improved resistance to fracture and tear propagation with the
									newer silastic. Studies of HP implants only have shown fewer
									fractures when compared to historical studies, although to our
									knowledge no controlled trials have been undertaken to evaluate
									this. (Figure 3)
  Infection was noted in 0.6% of reported implants by Foliart7. 
									Most series, including Swanson's, report a rate between 0.1
									and 1%1,2,4,5,8,12,18. Millender and Nalebuff have published
									a detailed report on infection after silicone arthroplasty in the
									hand. All of Millender's infections presented within 8 weeks
									of implantation. Staphylococcus Aureus was the most common
									organism isolated and most of the prostheses ultimately
									required removal, and an average of two weeks of antibiotic
									treatment12.
 Particulate synovitis and silicone induce lymphadenopathy
									have received substantial attention. Both of these
									complications were recorded in less than 0.1% of reported
									cases by Foliart7. Synovitis in MP implants occurred almost
									exclusively in fractured implants or in implants with substantial
									signs of wear at removal. Four patients with lymphadenopathy
									and silicone rubber implants have been reported who developed
									non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. All four were in rheumatoid
									patients with a concomitant 10-fold increased risk over the
									general population of developing lymphoma7. Alternative Implants  A variety of alternatives to silastic flexible implants have
									been proposed in the more than 30 years since they came in
									widespread use, but none have gained wide acceptance. (Figure 6) 
									Current alternatives include implant designs more analogous
									to joint replacements used in larger joints. (Figure 5A and B) 
									Specific differences from silastic arthroplasty include rigid
									fixation and the use of two distinct components. There are
									currently both cemented and cementless components available
									on the market. While these implant have been implanted and
									evaluated to a certain degree in the literature, further investigation
									is warranted to establish the indications, contraindications,
									results and longevity of these types of implants in relation to
									silastic MP arthroplasty for patients with RA.
 Summary Treatment of the arthritic rheumatoid MP joint requires
									consideration of the degree of compromise, as well as a thorough
									understanding of the anticipated outcome of the options
									for intervention. Silicone MP arthroplasty is one of the more
									successful operations performed in these patients when it is
									applied at the appropriate stage. The patient can anticipate a
									reversal of deformity, an active arc of motion of 40 to 50 degrees
									in a functional position and effective pain relief. Subjectively,
									patients report satisfaction with the correction of deformity and
									pain relief. Although MP arthroplasty is a successful procedure,
									problems do exist. Recurrence of a mild ulnar drift deformity
									occurs in a substantial percentage of patients. Implant fracture
									remains a concern, although the incidence of this problem has
									probably been reduced with the development of high performance
									silicone rubber. Longevity and reliable function beyond
									ten years has yet to be documented. Silicone arthroplasty provides
									an important method for the hand surgeon to improve the
									function of patients with severe MP disease. Future advances in
									implant technology and surgical technique will need to address
									existing problems to allow MP arthroplasty to become a more
									successful and widely applicable operation. Notes: Please address correspondence to:Philip E. Blazar, M.D.
 Assistant Professor in Orthopedic Surgery
 Harvard Medical School
 Attending Physician, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery
 Brigham and Women's Hospital
 75 Francis Street
 Boston, MA 02115
 (617) 732-8550
 pblazar@partners.org
 References:
										 
											Adams BD, Blair WF, Shurr DG. Schultz Metcarpophalangeal Arthroplasty: A long-term follow-up study. J Hand Surg. 1990;15A: 641-645.Beckenbaugh RD, Dobyns JH, Linscheid RL, Bryan RS. Review and Analysis of Silicone-Rubber Metacarpophalengeal Implants. J Bone Joint Surg 1976;58A:483-487.Beckenbaugh RD, Linscheid RL. Arthroplasty in the Hand and Wrist. In: Operative Hand Surgery. DP Green (ed). Churchill Livingstone, New York, 1993;143-188.Bieber EJ, Weiland AJ, Volenec-Dowling S. Silicone-Rubber Implant Arthroplasty of the Metacarpophalangeal Joints for Rheumatoid Arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986;68A:206-209.Blair WF, Shurr DG, Buckwalter JA. Metacarpophalangeal Joint Implant Arthroplasty with a Silastic Spacer. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66A:365-370.Cook SD, Beckenbaugh RD, Redondo J, Popich LS, Klawitter JJ, Linscheid RL. Long-term follow-up of pyrolytic carbon metacarpophalangeal implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999;81A:635-48Foliart DE. Swanson Silicone Finger Joint Implants: A Review of the Literature Regarding Long-term Complications. J Hand Surg Am. 1995;20A:445-449.Kirschenbaum D, Schneider L, Adams DC, Cody RP. Arthroplasty of the Metacarpophalangeal Joints with Use of Silicone-Rubber Implants in Patients who Have Rheumatoid Arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75A:3-12.Mandl LA, Galvin DH, Bosch JP, Georgon CC, Simmons BP, Axt TS, Fossel AH, Katz JN. Metacarpophalngeal arthroplasty in rheumatoid arthritis: what determines satisfaction with surgery?. Rheumatol. 2002 Dec 29(12)2488-91McMaster M. The Natural History of the Rheumatoid Metacarpo-Phalangeal joint. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1972;54B:687-697.Millender L, Nalebuff E. Metacarpophalangeal Joint Arthroplasty Utilizing the Silicone Rubber Prosthesis. Orthop Clin North Am. 1973;4:349-371.Millender LH, Nalebuff EA, Hawkins RB, Ennis R. Infection after Silicone Prosthetic Arthroplasty in the Hand. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975;57A:825-829.Minamikawa Y, Peimer CA, Ogawa R, Fujimoto K, Sherwin FS, Howard C. Experimental analysis of silicone implants used with titanium grommets. J Hand Surg Am. 1994;19A:567-74.Patterson P, Simmons BP, Ring D, Earp B: Static versus dynamic splinting and early motion after metacarpophalangeal arthroplasty. Presentated at 54th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Surgery of the Hand, September 1999, Boston, Massachusetts.Riordan DC, Fowler SB. Arthroplasty of the Metacarpophalangeal Joints: Review of Resection-type Arthroplasty. J Hand Surg. 1989;14A:368-370.Stirrat CR. Metacarpophalangeal Joints in Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand. Hand Clin. 1996;12:515-529.Swanson AB. A Flexible Implant for Replacement of Arthritic or Destroyed Joints in the Hand. NYU Post-Graduate Medical School Inter-Clin Inform Bull. 1966;6:16-19.Swanson AB. Flexible Implant Arthroplasty for Arthritic Finger Joints. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1972;54A:435-455.Swanson AB, Poitevin LA, Swanson GDG, Kearney J. Bone Remodeling Phenomena in flexible Implant Arthroplasty in the Metacarpophalengeal Joints. Clin Orthop. 1986;205:254-267.Swanson AB, Swanson GdG, Leonard JB. Postoperative Rehabilitaion Programs in Flexible Implant Arthroplasty of the Digits. In: Rehabilitation of the Hand: Surgery and Therapy. JM Hunter (ed). Mosby, St. Louis. 1995;1351-1376.Tupper JW. The Metacarpophalangeal Plate Arthroplasty. J Hand Surg Am. 1989;14A:371-375.Zancolli E. Structural and Dynamic Bases of Hand Surgery. In: Philadelphia, JB Lippincott, pp 325-360, 1979 |