Open AccessDifferent collagenase delivery for Dupuytren disease in public hospitals
Author(s) -
Jessca A Paynter,
Vicky Tobin,
James Leong,
Warren M. Rozen,
David J. Hunter-Smith
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
australasian journal of plastic surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2209-170X
DOI - 10.34239/ajops.v3n2.163
Subject(s) - medicine , collagenase , prospective cohort study , cohort study , cohort , clinical significance , surgery , biochemistry , enzyme , chemistry
Background: The delivery protocol of collagenase Clostridium histolyticum (collagenase) injection for Dupuytren’s disease is variable, due to limited evidence for any one approach and widespread ‘off-label’ delivery occurring in Australia. As such, this preliminary study aimed to assess whether different collagenase delivery protocols for treating Dupuytren’s disease have an impact on effectiveness and safety. It was hypothesised that different collagenase delivery would affect outcomes.Methods: This preliminary, prospective study included a consecutive cohort of adult patients with Dupuytren’s disease being treated with collagenase within two Australian public hospitals to determine whether different collagenase delivery protocols impact on effectiveness and safety. The therapeutic effect was measured objectively using the total passive extension deficit (TPED), clinical success and clinical improvement. Three patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were used: Unité Rhumatologique des Affections de la Main (URAM), the Southampton Dupuytren’s Scoring Scheme and the Canadian Occupational Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS).Results: The delivery of collagenase was variable at both clinics. The number of patients treated with collagenase at Institute I and Institute II was 49 and 18, respectively. Clinical success was achieved in 42 per cent of the Institute I and 35 per cent of the Institute II cohort. A statistically significant reduction in all three PROMs was observed for both cohorts. No significant differences between effectiveness or safety was found when comparing the two cohorts.Conclusion: The delivery of collagenase was variable at Institutes I and II, but these differences did not appear to impact the effectiveness or safety of collagenase delivery.