uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Dupuytren contracture recurrence project: reaching consensus on a definition of recurrence
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: Handchirurgie, Mikrochirurgie, Plastische Chirurgie, ISSN 0722-1819, E-ISSN 1439-3980, Vol. 46, no 6, 350-354 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The aim of this study was to determine a definition of recurrence of Dupuytren disease that could be utilized for the comparison of the results independently from the treatment used. 24 hand surgeons from 17 countries met in an international consensus conference. The participants used the Delphi method to evaluate a series of statements: (1) the need for defining recurrence, (2) the concept of recurrence applied to the Tubiana staging system, (3) the concept of recurrence applied to each single treated joint, and (4) the concept of recurrence applied to the finger ray. For each item, the possible answer was given on a scale of 1-5: 1=maximum disagreement; 2=disagreement; 3=agreement; 4=strong agreement; 5=absolute agreement. There was consensus on disagreement if 1 and 2 comprised at least 66% of the recorded answers and consensus on agreement if 3, 4 and 5 comprised at least 66% of the recorded answers. If a threshold of 66% was not reached, the related statement was considered "not defined". A need for a definition of recurrence was established. The presence of nodules or cords without finger contracture was not considered an indication of recurrence. The Tubiana staging system was considered inappropriate for reporting recurrence. Recurrence was best determined by the measurement of a specific joint, rather than a total ray. Time 0 occurred between 6 weeks and 3 months. Recurrence was defined as a PED of more than 20° for at least one of treated joint, in the presence of a palpable cord, compared to the result obtained at time 0. This study determined the need for a standard definition of recurrence and reached consensus on that definition, which we should become the standard for the reporting of recurrence. If utilized in subsequent publications, this will allow surgeons to compare different techniques and make is easier to help patients make an informed choice.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 46, no 6, 350-354 p.
National Category
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-246402DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1394420PubMedID: 25412239OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-246402DiVA: diva2:793161
Available from: 2015-03-06 Created: 2015-03-06 Last updated: 2015-11-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wilbrand, Stephan
By organisation
In the same journal
Handchirurgie, Mikrochirurgie, Plastische Chirurgie

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 294 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link