ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07910123TMChMUpdated Nov 4, 2026

Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of the TMChM Prosthesis in the Treatment of People With Chronic Flexor Tendon Fingers Injuries

An interventional study of Two-Stage Flexor Tendon Reconstruction with Temporary Tendon Prosthesis Implantation in Tendon Injuries, sponsored by ChM sp. z o.o.. Not yet recruiting at 2 sites in Poland. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-04.

Sponsored by ChM sp. z o.o. · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Updated Nov 4, 2026Primary outcomes revisedTitle changed+1 moreGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
86
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The objective of the study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the TMChM tendon prosthesis in the treatment of patients with chronic flexor tendon injuries of the fingers, compared with a reference tendon prosthesis currently used in clinical practice.

To achieve this objective, finger flexor tendon function will be assessed before and after implantation of either the TMChM tendon prosthesis or the reference prosthesis in patients with chronic flexor tendon injuries of the fingers.

The study is designed to demonstrate that the investigational TMChM tendon prosthesis is non-inferior in terms of effectiveness and safety to the prosthesis currently used in clinical practice.

The study aims to answer the following questions:

  • Does the use of the TMChM finger flexor tendon prosthesis result in non-inferior functional outcomes, as assessed by finger tendon function parameters, in patients with chronic flexor tendon injuries compared with the prosthesis currently used in clinical practice?
  • Can the TMChM tendon prosthesis be safely implanted using the intended surgical technique? The investigational medical device is the TMChM temporary finger flexor tendon prosthesis. The prosthesis incorporates an attachment for the FDS-FDP loop, enabling functional activation of the prosthesis and maintaining tension in the flexor muscles. Additionally, it allows for shaping of the FDS-FDP connection.

The patented TMChM temporary finger flexor tendon prosthesis features an attachment located at the proximal end of its silicone core. The prosthesis attachment has a semicircular cross-section, while the core has rounded sides and a rounded distal end.

The TMChM prosthesis is intended for implantation during the first stage of surgical treatment of chronic flexor tendon injuries of the fingers.

Furthermore, the TMChM prosthesis contains barium sulfate as a radiopaque marker, allowing it to be visualized during X-ray examinations.

02

Conditions studied

  • Tendon Injuries

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • chronic tendon injury
  • TMChM tendon prosthesis
  • temporary finger flexor tendon prosthesis
03

In context

Tendon Injuries

100 studies on the registry are indexed under Tendon Injuries; 27 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 86 is above the median of 44 across 70 interventional studies indexed under Tendon Injuries.

Browse Tendon Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with ChM sp. z o.o. as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Provision of written to participate in the clinical investigation.
  2. Male and female patients aged ≥18 years.
  3. Patients with chronic complete rupture of both finger flexor tendons (FDS and FDP):

    • Confirmed by X-ray examination.
    • Confirmed by ultrasound examination.
  4. Patients with failure of tendon repair (suture dehiscence) and/or tendon adhesions resulting in complete loss of tendon function:

    • Confirmed by X-ray examination.
    • Confirmed by ultrasound examination.
  5. Patients whose hand has been adequately prepared through rehabilitation, including:

    • Complete healing of previous fractures and wounds.
    • Removal of residual suture material.
    • Restoration of the maximum achievable passive range of motion in the affected joints.
  6. Patients who are not eligible for primary tendon repair due to the time elapsed since the finger flexor tendon injury (at least 6 weeks) and the condition of the surrounding tendon tissues.
  7. Patients with chronic complete rupture of both finger flexor tendons (FDS and FDP), with an injury duration not exceeding 3 years.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Inadequate condition of the skin and soft tissues at the surgical site that precludes surgical reconstruction.
  2. Poor general health status that prevents the patient from undergoing surgical treatment.
  3. Active infection at the planned surgical site.
  4. Neuromuscular disorders that may pose a high risk of surgical failure or postoperative complications.
  5. Suspected or documented allergy or intolerance to the prosthesis material.
  6. Inability or unwillingness to comply with the study procedures, postoperative instructions, rehabilitation requirements, or scheduled follow-up visits, as determined by the Investigator.
  7. Any condition in which the available finger flexor tendon prosthesis would be too large or too small to achieve a successful treatment outcome.
  8. Impaired blood supply or vascular insufficiency in the area intended for implantation of the finger flexor tendon prosthesis.
  9. Pregnancy (confirmed by a pregnancy test) or breastfeeding.
  10. Hand dysfunction caused by conditions other than chronic finger flexor tendon injuries, such as the absence of a bone segment.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Participant)
Enrollment
86 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    The group treated using the investigational TMChM tendon prosthesis

    Procedure: Two-Stage Flexor Tendon Reconstruction with Temporary Tendon Prosthesis Implantation

  • Active comparator
    The group treated using the comparator tendon prosthesis.

    Procedure: Two-Stage Flexor Tendon Reconstruction with Temporary Tendon Prosthesis Implantation

Interventions

  • ProcedureTwo-Stage Flexor Tendon Reconstruction with Temporary Tendon Prosthesis Implantation

    Chronic finger flexor tendon injuries are treated using a two-stage surgical procedure. During the first stage, the temporary tendon prosthesis is implanted to create a tendon sheath tunnel for subsequent grafting. The damaged tendon remnants are removed, and the pulleys and digital nerves are reconstructed if necessary. The prosthesis is secured distally to the FDP stump and proximally to the FDS-FDP tendon loop. Passive rehabilitation begins after wound healing. After approximately 10-12 weeks, the second procedure is performed. The prosthesis is removed and replaced with a tendon graft harvested from the forearm, which is passed through the newly formed tunnel and fixed to the distal phalanx. The procedure concludes with wound closure and immobilization of the wrist and fingers, followed by controlled postoperative rehabilitation.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Recovery of finger flexor tendon function

    Finger flexor tendon function is assessed with the Buck-Gramcko Scoring System (0-15 points; higher scores indicate better function). A goniometer and ruler are used to evaluate three components: (1) Total active motion (TAM), calculated as the sum of active flexion at the metacarpophalangeal (MCP), proximal interphalangeal (PIP) and distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints minus their extension deficits: \>159°=6, 141-159°=4, 120-140°=2, \<120°=0 points. (2) Fingertip-to-distal-palmar-crease distance during maximal active flexion: \<2.5 cm=6, 2.5-\<4 cm=4, 4-6 cm=2, \>6 cm=0 points. (3) Total active extension deficit across MCP, PIP and DIP joints: 0-30°=3, 31-50°=2, 51-70°=1, \>70°=0 points. Component scores are summed (0-15): excellent=14-15, good=11-13, fair=7-10, poor=0-6. The total score is compared between TMChM and reference-prosthesis groups; the target difference is 1.5 points in favor of TMChM.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 12 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Finger Range of Motion

    Assessment of the total active flexion of the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) and distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, corrected for extension deficits, using the Modified Strickland method. The expected improvement is 10 ± 5% following treatment with the TMChM prosthesis and its dedicated surgical technique compared with the reference prosthesis.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 12 months

  2. Grip and Pinch Strength

    Assessment of overall hand grip strength and pinch strength using a Jamar hydraulic dynamometer. The expected improvement is 10 ± 5% in the TMChM group compared with the reference prosthesis group.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 12 months

  3. Two-Point Discrimination

    Assessment of tactile sensitivity using the Dellon two-point discriminator. The expected outcome is a reduction of 3 ± 1 mm in the minimum distance between two distinguishable points in the TMChM group compared with the reference prosthesis group.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 12 months

  4. Upper Extremity Function

    Hand function will be assessed using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, a validated 30-item patient-reported outcome measure evaluating upper limb function, limitations in daily activities, and symptoms, including pain. Each item is rated on a 5-point scale (1-5). Responses are converted into a total DASH score ranging from 0 to 100 points, where 0 indicates no disability and 100 indicates the most severe disability. Higher scores reflect worse upper limb function and greater symptom burden. A decrease in the DASH score indicates clinical improvement. The study aims to demonstrate a 10±5% improvement in hand function and reduction in pain-related symptoms in patients treated with the investigational TMChM prosthesis compared with those treated with the reference prosthesis.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 12 months

  5. Pain Intensity

    Hand pain intensity is assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), a patient-reported measure of subjective pain intensity. Patients indicate their perceived pain level on a 10-cm scale ranging from 0 to 10, where 0 represents no pain and 10 represents the worst imaginable or unbearable pain. Scores of 1-3 indicate mild pain, 4-6 moderate pain, and 7-10 severe to unbearable pain. Higher scores indicate greater pain intensity and a worse clinical outcome, while lower scores indicate less pain and a better outcome. A decrease in the VAS score reflects improvement in pain symptoms. The study aims to demonstrate a 10±5% reduction in hand pain intensity following treatment with the investigational TMChM temporary flexor tendon prosthesis compared with the reference prosthesis.

    Time frame: From enrollment to the end of treatment at 12 months

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • Clinical Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology of the Movement Organ, Medical University of Gdańsk.
    Gdansk, 80-803, Poland
    • Tomasz Mazurek, Prof. DsC. MD · Contactmazurek@gumed.edu.pl · +48 58 76 40 210
    • Tomasz Mazurek, Prof. DsC. MD · Principal investigator
  • Department of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, Hospital of Święta Jadwiga Śląska in Trzebnica
    Trzebnica, 55-100, Poland
    • Ahmed Elsaftawy, PhD. MD · Contactelsaftawyahmed@gmail.com · +48 71 312 09 20
    • Ahmed Elsaftawy, PhD. MD · Principal investigator
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Griffin M, Hindocha S, Jordan D, Saleh M, Khan W. An overview of the management of flexor tendon injuries. Open Orthop J. 2012;6:28-35. doi: 10.2174/1874325001206010028. Epub 2012 Feb 23. PubMed 22431948 ↗
  • Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN; Upper Extremity Collaborative Group. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 May;87(5):1038-46. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02060. PubMed 15866967 ↗
  • Poggetti A, Novi M, Rosati M, Ciclamini D, Scaglione M, Battiston B. Treatment of flexor tendon reconstruction failures: multicentric experience with Brunelli active tendon implant. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2018 Jul;28(5):877-883. doi: 10.1007/s00590-017-2102-x. Epub 2017 Dec 7. PubMed 29218649 ↗
  • Hunter JM, Jaeger SH. Tendon implants: primary and secondary usage. Orthop Clin North Am. 1977 Apr;8(2):473-89. PubMed 142944 ↗
  • Ketchum LD. Twenty-five-year follow-up evaluation of an active silicone/Dacron tendon interposition prosthesis: A case report. J Hand Surg Am. 2000 Jul;25(4):731-3. doi: 10.1053/jhsu.2000.8644. PubMed 10913215 ↗
  • Paneva-Holevich E. Two-stage reconstruction of the flexor tendons. Int Orthop. 1982;6(2):133-8. doi: 10.1007/BF00268657. PubMed 7152747 ↗
  • Beris AE, Darlis NA, Korompilias AV, Vekris MD, Mitsionis GI, Soucacos PN. Two-stage flexor tendon reconstruction in zone II using a silicone rod and a pedicled intrasynovial graft. J Hand Surg Am. 2003 Jul;28(4):652-60. doi: 10.1016/s0363-5023(03)00146-1. PubMed 12877856 ↗
  • Chamay A. [The history of flexor tendon surgery]. Ann Chir Main Memb Super. 1997;16(1):9-15. doi: 10.1016/s0753-9053(97)80013-0. French. PubMed 9131943 ↗
  • Hunter JM. Staged flexor tendon reconstruction. J Hand Surg Am. 1983 Sep;8(5 Pt 2):789-93. doi: 10.1016/s0363-5023(83)80274-3. No abstract available. PubMed 6630959 ↗
  • Battiston B, Triolo PF, Bernardi A, Artiaco S, Tos P. Secondary repair of flexor tendon injuries. Injury. 2013 Mar;44(3):340-5. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.01.023. Epub 2013 Jan 21. PubMed 23347767 ↗
  • Langer MF, Wieskotter B, Herrmann K, Oeckenpohler S. [Flexor tendon transplantation]. Orthopade. 2015 Oct;44(10):777-85. doi: 10.1007/s00132-015-3156-2. German. PubMed 26399731 ↗
  • O'Shea K, Wolfe SW. Two-stage reconstruction with the modified Paneva-Holevich technique. Hand Clin. 2013 May;29(2):223-33. doi: 10.1016/j.hcl.2013.02.011. Epub 2013 Apr 6. PubMed 23660058 ↗
  • Abdul-Kader MH, Amin MA. Two-stage reconstruction for flexor tendon injuries in zone II using a silicone rod and pedicled sublimis tendon graft. Indian J Plast Surg. 2010 Jan;43(1):14-20. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1699397. PubMed 20924443 ↗
  • Darlis NA, Beris AE, Korompilias AV, Vekris MD, Mitsionis GI, Soucacos PN. Two-stage flexor tendon reconstruction in zone 2 of the hand in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 2005 May-Jun;25(3):382-6. doi: 10.1097/01.bpo.0000152939.28413.a2. PubMed 15832160 ↗
  • Viegas SF. A new modification of two-stage flexor tendon reconstruction. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg. 2006 Sep;10(3):177-80. doi: 10.1097/01.bth.0000232868.82782.ff. PubMed 16974224 ↗
  • Boyer MI, Gelberman RH, Burns ME, Dinopoulos H, Hofem R, Silva MJ. Intrasynovial flexor tendon repair. An experimental study comparing low and high levels of in vivo force during rehabilitation in canines. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001 Jun;83(6):891-9. PubMed 11407798 ↗
  • Gelberman RH, Siegel DB, Woo SL, Amiel D, Takai S, Lee D. Healing of digital flexor tendons: importance of the interval from injury to repair. A biomechanical, biochemical, and morphological study in dogs. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991 Jan;73(1):66-75. PubMed 1985996 ↗
  • Hagberg L, Selvik G. Tendon excursion and dehiscence during early controlled mobilization after flexor tendon repair in zone II: an x-ray stereophotogrammetric analysis. J Hand Surg Am. 1991 Jul;16(4):669-80. doi: 10.1016/0363-5023(91)90193-f. PubMed 1880365 ↗
  • Greenough CG. The effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields on flexor tendon healing in the rabbit. J Hand Surg Br. 1996 Dec;21(6):808-12. doi: 10.1016/s0266-7681(96)80198-7. PubMed 8982935 ↗
  • Aydin A, Topalan M, Mezdegi A, Sezer I, Ozkan T, Erer M, Hosbay Z. [Flexor tendoplasty with a tendon prosthesis for zone II flexor tendon injuries]. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2003;37(5):374-8. Turkish. PubMed 14963393 ↗
  • Pytlasinski M. [Use of a silicone prosthesis in two-staged reconstructive surgery of flexor tendons in fingers]. Polim Med. 1997;27(3-4):39-73. Polish. PubMed 9513253 ↗
  • Langer MF, Wieskotter B, Oeckenpohler S, Unglaub F, Spies C, Grunert JG. [Secondary reconstruction of flexor tendons]. Unfallchirurg. 2020 Feb;123(2):114-125. doi: 10.1007/s00113-019-00747-9. German. PubMed 31822942 ↗
  • Culp R. Reconstruction of flexor tendon with hunter tendon implant. Operative Techniques in Orthopaedics, 3, 4. 1993, 298-302
  • Freilich AM, Chhabra AB. Secondary flexor tendon reconstruction, a review. J Hand Surg Am. 2007 Nov;32(9):1436-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2007.08.018. PubMed 17996781 ↗
  • Coyle MP Jr, Leddy TP, Leddy JP. Staged flexor tendon reconstruction fingertip to palm. J Hand Surg Am. 2002 Jul;27(4):581-5. doi: 10.1053/jhsu.2002.34319. PubMed 12132079 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided — The clinical investigation is conducted by a commercial sponsor and concerns a medical device owned by the sponsor. The sponsor has not yet decided whether the study results will be published in scientific journals.

09

Updates

2 registry updates since Sep 25, 2026
Primary outcomes
1 description edited
What changed in the outcomes
  • DescriptionRecovery of finger flexor tendon function: how it is measured was reworded
Nov 4, 2026
Secondary outcomes
2 description edited
What changed in the outcomes
  • DescriptionPain Intensity: how it is measured was reworded
  • DescriptionUpper Extremity Function: how it is measured was reworded
Nov 4, 2026
Title
A National, Randomized, Single-blind Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of the TMChM Prosthesis in the Treatment of People With Chronic Flexor Tendon Fingers Injuries Compared to the Prosthesis Used in Clinical Practice
Nov 4, 2026
Registered
First appeared on the registry
Nov 2, 2026
Show all 2 updates
  1. Nov 4, 2026
    Primary outcomes 1 description edited
    What changed in the outcomes
    • DescriptionRecovery of finger flexor tendon function: how it is measured was reworded
    Secondary outcomes 2 description edited
    What changed in the outcomes
    • DescriptionPain Intensity: how it is measured was reworded
    • DescriptionUpper Extremity Function: how it is measured was reworded
    Title A National, Randomized, Single-blind Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of the TMChM Prosthesis in the Treatment of People With Chronic Flexor Tendon Fingers Injuries Compared to the Prosthesis Used in Clinical Practice
    + 1 other change: verification date
  2. Nov 2, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07910123
Lead sponsor
ChM sp. z o.o.
Collaborators
CTC Team Sp. z o.o.
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 2, 2026
Start date
Apr 1, 2027 (estimated)
Primary completion
Mar 31, 2029 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 31, 2030 (estimated)
Last update
Nov 4, 2026

Study contacts

Andrzej Małkowski, PhD
Contact
andrzej.malkowski@chm.eu
+48 85 8686 309
Robert Kranc
Contact
robert.kranc@chm.eu
+48 85 8686 309
Tomasz Mazurek, Prof. DsC. MD
principal investigator · Medical University of Gdańsk, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology of the Movement Organ

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Nov 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion