Early Postoperative Results of Percutaneous Needle Fasciotomy in 451 Patients with Dupuytren Disease

Sanne Molenkamp*, Tanneke A M Schouten, Dieuwke C Broekstra, Paul M N Werker, J Daniel Moolenburgh

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)


Background: Percutaneous needle fasciotomy is a minimally invasive treatment modality for Dupuytren disease. In this study, the authors analyzed the efficacy and complication rate of percutaneous needle fasciotomy using a statistical method that takes the multilevel structure of data, regarding multiple measurements from the same patient, into account.

Methods: The data of 470 treated rays from 451 patients with Dupuytren disease that underwent percutaneous needle fasciotomy were analyzed retrospectively. The authors described the early postoperative results of percutaneous needle fasciotomy and applied linear mixed models to compare mean correction of passive extension deficit between joints and efficacy of primary versus secondary percutaneous needle fasciotomy.

Results: Mean preoperative passive extension deficits at the metacarpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal, and distal interphalangeal joints were 37, 40, and 31 degrees, respectively. Mean preoperative total passive extension deficit was 54 degrees. Results were excellent, with a mean total passive extension deficit correction of 85 percent. Percutaneous needle fasciotomy was most effective for metacarpophalangeal joints and less effective for proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal joints. Secondary percutaneous needle fasciotomy was as effective as primary percutaneous needle fasciotomy. Complications were rare and mostly minor.

Conclusion: The results of this study confirm that percutaneous needle fasciotomy is an effective and safe treatment modality for patients with mild to moderate disease who prefer a minimally invasive procedure.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1415-1421
Number of pages7
JournalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Issue number6
Publication statusPublished - Jun-2017



Cite this