Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2025

10:35
Novel Diagnostics in Revision Arthroplasty: Implant Sonication and Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction
Published on: December 3, 2017
11.2K
Distal Interphalangeal Joint Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review
Devam Modi1, Omer Slevin1,2,3, Hargun Bhalla1
1Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
The Journal of Hand Surgery Asian-Pacific Volume
|September 27, 2023
Summary
Distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint arthroplasty effectively relieves arthritis pain but has a 15% complication rate. Preservation of DIP motion is its key advantage over fusion, but evidence limits its use to specific cases.
Area of Science:
- Orthopedic Surgery
- Hand Surgery
- Joint Reconstruction
Background:
- Symptomatic distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint arthritis is often treated with arthrodesis (fusion).
- DIP joint arthroplasty has been an alternative treatment since 1977.
- This review examines evidence for DIP arthroplasty in arthritis unresponsive to conservative care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review the current evidence on distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint arthroplasty.
- To evaluate its efficacy and complication rates for treating refractory arthritis.
- To compare its outcomes with DIP arthrodesis.
Main Methods:
- Systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases.
- Adherence to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
- Risk of bias assessment using the ROBINS-I tool.
Main Results:
- Six studies (Level IV evidence) were included in the narrative review.
- DIP arthroplasty demonstrated effectiveness in pain relief and functional improvement.
- Complication rate was 15%, with instability (2.5%) and infection (2.1%) most common; re-operation rate was 8%.
Conclusions:
- DIP arthroplasty is effective for painful DIP arthritis, offering motion preservation over arthrodesis.
- A 15% complication rate necessitates careful patient selection.
- Limited high-quality evidence suggests its use should be reserved for patients prioritizing DIP motion preservation.

