{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023587833643699565, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008069522036002483, 'mean_word_length': 5.473895582329317, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Clinical Outcomes of Revision Surgery Using a Dorsal Approach After Failed Primary Interdigital Neuroma Excision.

BACKGROUND
Revision neurectomy may be approached with either a dorsal or a plantar incision. Although a plantar approach is more commonly described, few studies have investigated outcomes following a dorsal revision neuroma excision. In this study, we performed a case series on a group of patients who underwent revision neuroma excision through a dorsal approach and reported complications and outcomes using validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs).


METHODS
This retrospective case series included 10 patients who underwent a dorsal-approach revision neuroma excision and had preoperative and minimum 1-year postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores. Complications including neuroma recurrence and continued unresolved pain were obtained from the electronic medical record. Preoperative and postoperative PROMIS scores were compared to assess improvement in PROMs.


RESULTS
There were significant improvements in the PROMIS pain interference (P = .026), pain intensity (P = .008), and global physical health (P = .017) domains. One patient experienced recurrence of their neuroma 4 years after surgery.


CONCLUSION
This case series provides preliminary data indicating that revision neurectomy using a dorsal approach leads to satisfactory outcomes in pain-related PROMs. Further research with comparative study designs is necessary to determine if one approach is superior to the other.


LEVELS OF EVIDENCE
Level IV: Retrospective.