This study evaluated the outcomes of double mobility trapeziometacarpal prostheses for treating osteoarthritis (OA) of the trapeziometacarpal (TMC) joint. A prospective observational analysis was conducted on 150 implants with a maximum follow-up of four years, including a clinical and radiographic assessment and an evaluation of complications. The results indicate a prosthesis survival rate of 97.9% after the first two years post-surgery, calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Significant improvements were observed in pain reduction (mean VAS at 3 months post-surgery 2,9 and 1.5 after 6 months), hand grip strength (25.93 kg at 6 months post-surgery), and range of motion (Kapandji score from 8.8 to 9.2, comparing the preoperative mean with the mean after the first postoperative month). The complication rate was low, with only two cases of cup migration and one case of trapezium resorption. Patient satisfaction was high due to the rapid functional recovery and reduced invasiveness compared to traditional techniques. Double-mobility prostheses offer a highly effective treatment for stage II and III TMC OA according to the Eaton-Littler classification, with minimal need for revision surgeries.

Purpose: Thumb osteoarthritis is a debilitating condition that affects a large portion of the elderly population. Conservative treatments for this condition often fail, and a surgical solution is required. Many different surgical techniques have been described, but the current literature has not yet demonstrated the superiority of one over the others. In this study, we analyzed the clinical and radiological findings of a population of 26 patients who were operated on both hands but with different techniques. Methods: One hand underwent trapeziectomy with suspension arthroplasty, while the other hand was operated on with a double mobility trapeziometacarpal prosthesis. Results: Our findings show that, while on the long-term follow-up the two techniques are equally valid, in the short term, the hands that were operated on with the prosthesis had a faster recovery of strength and pain. Conclusion: Therefore, we reckon that double mobility trapeziometacarpal prostheses are a better choice of treatment, especially for patients who require a faster recovery for work or leisure activities.

Background: Trapeziometacarpal (TM) joint arthritis is a common condition causing pain and functional limitations, particularly in activities requiring pinch and grip strength. Surgical options such as interposition trapeziectomy and prosthetic joint replacement have demonstrated varying degrees of success. However, the role of post-operative rehabilitation in optimizing outcomes for these procedures remains underexplored. Effective rehabilitation may be critical for restoring strength, range of motion (ROM), and overall hand function; yet, no consensus exists on the best approach for either surgical modality. This study aims to evaluate the impact of post-operative rehabilitation on functional and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing interposition trapeziectomy versus prosthetic replacement for TM joint arthritis. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients treated for TM joint arthritis between November 2023 and October 2024. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical procedure: interposition trapeziectomy and prosthetic replacement. Patients randomly followed post-operative rehabilitation protocols, auto-assisted exercises, or no type of rehabilitation. The outcomes assessed included pain (VAS), return to work or heavy activities, post-operative complications, hand function (DASH score), and patient satisfaction at 1 and 6 months after surgery. Results: The prosthesis group consisted of 30 patients, while 31 patients underwent interposition trapeziectomy. Patients in both groups showed good improvements in pain, ROM, and hand function post rehabilitation. The prosthetic group demonstrated a faster recovery of strength and higher early satisfaction scores, but in the long term, the results were overlapping. No significant differences were observed in long-term functional outcomes or patient satisfaction at 6 months. In the trapeziectomy group, for patients who followed a rehabilitation program, no significant differences were found. Conclusions: Post-operative rehabilitation finds its place in recovery after both interposition trapeziectomy and prosthetic replacement for TM joint arthritis. While prosthetic replacement allows for quicker functional recovery, interposition trapeziectomy offers comparable long-term results with a lower complication profile. Tailored rehabilitation protocols may enhance outcomes and should be considered an integral part of TM joint arthritis management in selected patients.

Background/Objectives: Trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis (TMC OA) is a common disabling condition. This study compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of trapeziectomy with suspension arthroplasty and dual mobility TMC joint replacement in a prospective comparative cohort study design. Methods: A prospective comparative study was conducted on 122 patients contributing 129 hands with Eaton–Littler stage II–III TMC osteoarthritis. Patients were treated with trapeziectomy with suspension arthroplasty (58 patients, 60 hands) or TMC joint replacement with a dual mobility prosthesis (64 patients, 69 hands), based on surgical indication and shared decision-making. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed up to 24 months postoperatively. Results: Both techniques significantly improved pain, function, range of motion, and strength (p < 0.05). Joint replacement provided faster pain relief and functional recovery, with superior strength at all follow-up points. At 12 months, pain and functional outcomes were comparable between groups. No implant loosening or failures were observed. Conclusions: Both surgical techniques are effective for TMC osteoarthritis. Dual mobility TMC joint replacement allows faster recovery and greater strength, while achieving comparable mid-term clinical outcomes to suspension arthroplasty.

Background/Objectives: Thumb basal joint arthritis is a common degenerative condition often requiring surgery when conservative treatment fails. Dual mobility trapeziometacarpal prostheses are increasingly used, but the optimal anesthetic strategy remains debatable. This study aimed to explore whether WALANT provides intraoperative analgesia and short-term safety comparable to axillary block in dual mobility trapeziometacarpal arthroplasty. Methods: A prospective observational comparative study was carried out on 21 patients (11 WALANT, 10 axillary block) undergoing dual mobility trapeziometacarpal prosthesis for stage II–III in thumb basal joint arthritis according to Eaton–Littler classification at two hospital facilities of ASL Roma 5, from February–December 2025. Patients treated with the WALANT technique were assigned to Group A, whereas those undergoing an axillary block were assigned to Group B. Pain intensity was recorded on a 0–10 visual analogue scale at three stages: during anesthetic administration, during surgery, and 3 h after the procedure. Group A received a field infiltration with 1% mepivacaine combined with epinephrine 1:100,000 and sodium bicarbonate, while Group B underwent an ultrasound-guided brachial plexus block using 0.5–0.7% ropivacaine and a pneumatic tourniquet inflated to 250 mmHg. Results: Pain during anesthesia induction was similar between groups (Group A 3.18 ± 2.89 vs. Group B 2.20 ± 2.37, p = 0.393). Intraoperative pain did not differ significantly (Group A 2.27 ± 1.79 vs. Group B 2.00 ± 2.71, p = 0.898). At 3 h postoperative, Group B showed a trend toward lower pain levels (Group A 4.36 ± 2.54 vs. Group B 3.00 ± 3.08, p = 0.244). No anesthetic failures, no conversion to general anesthesia, and no neurological or ischemic complications occurred in either group. Conclusions: In this prospective observational comparative cohort, WALANT and axillary block provide comparable intraoperative analgesia for dual mobility trapeziometacarpal prosthesis, with comparable safety profiles. WALANT offers advantages in ease of administration, absence of tourniquet-related risks, and potential for intraoperative functional testing. Axillary block provides more prolonged postoperative analgesia in the first 3 h. The choice between techniques should be individualized based on patient-specific factors, anxiety profile, and local expertise. These results should be interpreted as preliminary and hypothesis-generating, given the exploratory design, the small sample size, and the limited statistical power of the study.

Background: Use of a prosthesis to replace small hand joints, mainly in patients with degenerative osteoarthritis or with sequelae of fractures, is more and more common. As for other joints, use of a prosthesis usually leads to good functional results but is not free of complications such as implant infection. We discuss a possible solution by presenting a single case treated by means of a custom-made spacer in our hospital and comparing it to the very few options available in the literature. Methods: A 30-year-old active male, treated in another hospital two years before for an articular fracture of the middle phalanx of the ring finger of his left hand, came to our center with a rigid digit. He was therefore treated with a Swanson proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint prosthesis. At one-month follow-up, the patient presented clear signs of infection of his implant. The authors removed the infected implant and replaced it with a small custom-made antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. The patient underwent a long-lasting postoperative oral antibiotic therapy. Four months later, a new Swanson prosthesis was successfully implanted. A literature review was performed. Results: When the patient first came to our hospital, he presented with a rigid digit, reaching a PIP joint range of motion (ROM) in flexion–extension of 0–90° the day after our first surgery. At one-month follow-up, with the infected prosthesis, the ROM was 10–40°. After the last surgery, with the implant of a new Swanson prosthesis, at the two-year (24-month) follow-up, the patient was infection-free, the PIP joint ROM was 10–90°, and the patient was very satisfied. Conclusions: The literature discusses few cases of PIP prosthesis infection, and most of those are treated with implant removal and arthrodesis. The use of a custom-made antibiotic-loaded cement spacer should be considered by hand surgeons managing this complication as a motion-preserving alternative to more definitive salvage procedures.