Percutaneous versus open release for trigger finger: a retrospective comparison of outcomes, complications…

ObservationalJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research· Jun 2026

Percutaneous versus open release for trigger finger: a retrospective comparison of outcomes, complications, and costs in 110 patients from a Swedish cohort.

Cecilia Stalberg Ostwald, Anders Henricson, Daniel Muder

Hand & WristObservationalTreatmentQ1IF 3.8

Percutaneous release resolved trigger finger in just 52% of cases treated.

Percutaneous versus open release for trigger finger: a retrospective comparison of outcomes, complications, and costs in 110 patients from a Swedish cohort.

Cecilia Stalberg Ostwald … Daniel Muder

Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · Jun 2026 · Q1 in Orthopedics

Background

Trigger finger (trigger finger) is a common hand condition often requiring surgery.

Purpose

This study compares outcomes, complications, and resource use between percutaneous release and OS in a Swedish hospital setting where percutaneous release was newly introduced.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational study including 110 patients treated for trigger finger between 2018 and 2020 at the Department of Orthopaedics, Falu Regional Hospital, Falun, Sweden.

n = 110 patients

Results

percutaneous release stopped triggering in only about half

52%

PR

93%

OS

More results

Secondary interventions were required in 19 (38%) percutaneous release cases versus 2 (2%) in the OS group.

Minor transient symptoms (e.g. tenderness, scar pain) were reported by 8% of percutaneous release patients and 6% of OS patients.

Estimated treatment cost per patient was 53 USD for percutaneous release and 138 USD for OS.

More results

Despite lower effectiveness, 69% of percutaneous release patients indicated willingness to undergo the same procedure again, compared to 97% in the OS group.

“

Conclusion · 1 of 2

While percutaneous release of the A1 pulley is safe, it was significantly less effective in eliminating triggering compared to open surgery. The procedure might be more technically demanding than previously assumed.

Conclusion · 2 of 2

Further prospective studies are needed to clarify its cost-effectiveness in different clinical settings, e.g. when performed by less experienced surgeons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Percutaneous versus open release for trigger finger: a retrospective comparison of outcomes, complications, and costs in 110 patients from a Swedish cohort.

Percutaneous versus open release for trigger finger: a retrospective comparison of outcomes, complications, and costs in 110 patients from a Swedish cohort.

Related papers