Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 11;11(3):262–268. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1733877

Table 2. Clinical results from the main published studies on STT Pyrocarbon implants.

Literature Pyrocarbon implant Cases Mean FU (mo) ROM FE – RUD (% of contralateral side or preoperative) Grip – pinch strength (% of contralateral side or preoperative) Functional scores Revision surgery (%)
Pequignot et al (2005) STPI 15 48 n/a – n/a n/a – n/a n/a None
Pegoli et al (2006) STPI 10 19 n/a – n/a 133–140 D: 39 2 dislocations (20)
Mathoulin and Darin (2006) Arthroscopic + STPI 13 20 n/a – n/a n/a – n/a n/a 2 dislocations (15)
Low and Edmunds (2007) STPI 9 16 107–72 82–85 D: 21 None
Lluch et al (2013) STPI 21 29 n/a 84–92 n/a None
Marcuzzi et al (2014) STPI 8 77 87 in total n/a – n/a n/a None
Pegoli et al (2016) Arthroscopic + STPI 13 24 n/a – n/a 135–168 D: 39 None
Gauthier et al (2017) Pyrocardan 22 24 89–93 109–140 QD: 19; PRWE: 14 1 RSI/ 1 calcification (9)
Average 15 26 98–82 a 114–125 QD: 29; PRWE: 14 0.75
Median 13 24 98–82 a 109–140 / 0
Our study Pyrocardan 18 63 109–90 88–91 QD: 23; PRWE: 22 1 calcification (6)

Abbreviations: D, Dash score; FU, follow-up; n/a, not available; QD, QuickDASH score; ROM FE – RUD, range of motion in flexion–extension – radioulnar deviation; RSI, radioscaphoid impingement; STT, scaphotrapeziotrapezoid; VAS, visual analogue scale.

a

Exclusion of the Marcuzzi results.