Volar locking plating versus percutaneous Kirschner wires for distal radius fractures in an adult population: a meta‐analysis

Comparison between Volar Locking Plate and Kirschner Wire Fixation for Unstable Distal Radius Fracture: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Objective  This study aims to compare the outcomes of volar locking plating (VLP) versus percutaneous Kirschner wires (K-wire) fixation for surgical management of unstable distal radius fractures. Methods  We systematically searched multiple databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central till January 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met eligibility criteria. Following outcomes were evaluated at 6-week, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up period: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score, grip strength, range of motion, and complication incidence. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects models and results presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence interval. Results  Fourteen RCTs with 1,450 participants met the inclusion criteria. DASH scores were significantly better for VLP fixation at 6th week (MD = 19.02; p  < 0.001), 3rd (MD = 10.79; p  < 0.001), 6th (MD= 7.78; p  < 0.001), and 12th month (MD = 2.94; p  < 0.001) postoperation. At 3-month follow-up period, VLP treatment exhibited better grip strength (MD = - 10.32; p  < 0.001) and PRWE scores (MD = 8.78; p  < 0.001). There was a statistically significant early advantage in flexion, extension, pronation, supination, radial deviation, and ulnar deviation in the VLP group at 6-week follow-up, but at 1-year follow-up only significantly better extension was observed. At 1 year, radiographic outcomes were similar except for volar tilt favoring VLP fixation ( p  < 0.001). Superficial infections were more common in patients treated with K-wire (RR = 2.89; p  = 0.001), but there was no difference in total complications or reoperation rates ( p  > 0.05). Conclusion  This meta-analysis suggests that VLP fixation and K-wire fixation are both effective procedures, but existing literature does not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate the superiority of either method. Although VLP fixation improves DASH score, extension and volar tilt at 12-month follow-up, the difference is small and unlikely to be noticeable to the patients.

Distal radius fracture osteosynthesis by volar locking plate: influence of epiphyseal screw positioning on risk of loss of reduction

Ulnar variance is an important radiological parameter for good functional outcome after distal radius fracture osteosynthesis. Secondary loss of reduction due to radial shortening is a common complication after volar locking plate fixation. Some authors recommend beginning by placing the most ulnar epiphyseal screw, ensuring that it is positioned as close as possible to the distal radioulnar and radiocarpal joints. The hypothesis of our study was that the positioning of the ulnar epiphyseal screw relative to the distal radioulnar and radiocarpal joints influences the maintenance of reduction during follow-up. 190 distal radius fractures were treated with volar locking plate fixation and divided into two cohorts: cohort A with <2 mm and cohort B with ≥2 mm loss of ulnar variance. Minimum follow-up was 45 days. The positioning of the most ulnar epiphyseal screw was evaluated using a single variable, the ulno-distal index. Means were compared using t-tests and proportions using chi-squared tests. The alpha risk was set at 5%. The intra- and inter-observer reliability of the ulno-distal index measurement were assessed. Mean ulno-distal index was significantly lower in cohort A at 11.28 mm, compared to 13.33 mm in cohort B; p < 0.0001. Ulno-distal index <12 mm was a significant protective factor: p < 0.0001 and relative risk 0.558. No other intrinsic or extrinsic factors of secondary loss of reduction significantly influenced the risk of ulnar variance alteration. The study confirmed the hypothesis that, in distal radius fracture treated with volar locking plate fixation, the closer the ulnar epiphyseal screw to the distal radioulnar joint and radiocarpal joint, the lower the risk of ulnar variance alteration.

Buried or exposed Kirschner wire for the management of hand and forearm fractures: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

The recommendation on whether to bury or expose the Kirschner wire (K-wire) for the management of fractures has still been controversial with inconsistent results in the published studies due to the potential issue associated with exposed K-wire is the heightened risk of infection, as it comes into direct contact with the external environment and air. This study aims to summarize the specific outcomes between buried and exposed K-wire for the management of hand and forearm fractures.

METHODS

We conducted relevant literature searches on Europe PMC, Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases using specific keywords. This investigation focuses on individuals of any age diagnosed with hand or forearm fractures who underwent surgery involving Kirschner wire (K-wire) fixation. It examines the comparison between buried and exposed K-wire fixation, emphasizing primary outcome pin infection, along with secondary outcomes such as early pin removal, days to pin removal, and surgical duration. The study includes observational studies (cohort/case-control) or randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The results of continuous variables were pooled into the standardized mean difference (SMD), while dichotomous variables were pooled into odds ratio (OR) along with 95% confidence intervals using random-effect models. The quality of included studies was assessed with Cochrane Collaborations, Risk of Bias version 2 (RoB v2).

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies were included. Our pooled analysis revealed that buried K-wire was associated with a lower risk of pin site infection [RR 0.49 (95% CI 0.36-0.67), p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%] and 33.85 days longer duration until pin removal [MD 33.85 days (95% CI 18.68-49.02), p < 0.0001, I2 = 99%] when compared with exposed K-wire. However, the duration of surgery was 9.98 minutes significantly longer in the buried K-wire [MD 6.98 minutes (95% CI 2.19-11.76), p = 0.004, I2 = 42%] with no significant difference in the early pin removal rate [RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.36-1.45), p = 0.37, I2 = 0%]. Further regression analysis revealed that sample size, age, sex, and duration of follow-up did not affect those relationships.

CONCLUSION

Buried K-wire may offer benefits in reducing the infection rate with a longer duration until pin removal. However, further RCTs with larger sample sizes are still needed to confirm the results of our study.

The Choice of Osteosynthesis for Distal Radius Fractures: A Matter of Taste, Fracture Instability, or Patient-Related Factors? A Retrospective Study of Functional Outcome in 346 Distal Radius Fractures Operated With Percutaneous Wires or Volar Plate Fixation

BACKGROUND

Surgery with volar locking plate (VLP) for distal radius fractures (DRFs) has become dominant over percutaneous Kirschner wire (K-wire) (PKW) fixation. Not many studies have proved advantages of the VLP and the increasing dominance of the VLP is thus not derived from evidence of superiority but influenced by other factors.

METHODS

By retrospectively classifying 346 DRFs treated with either PKW or VLP fixation, according to the Buttazzoni classification system, we aimed to investigate the determining factors for choice of surgical method, and by review of the patients' medical records, the functional outcome, duration, and frequentness of the rehabilitation period were correlated to Buttazzoni type and surgical method.

RESULTS

The odds ratio of having volar plate fixation was negatively correlated to age and positively correlated to a higher Buttazzoni type. We found no clinically significant differences in the functional outcome for different Buttazzoni type of fractures within the VLP and PKW groups, respectively, nor between the 2 methods of surgery for any Buttazzoni type of fracture.

CONCLUSION

Younger patients and fractures with higher grade of instability were more likely to be treated with VLP than PKW; however, neither fracture instability nor surgical method had any impact on functional outcome.

Questions, answers and challenges: Summarising the guidance for distal radius fractures

This article summarises the current recommendations from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), the British Orthopaedic Association (BOA), the British Society for Surgery of the Hand (BSSH) and the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for the management of distal radius fractures (DRF). We performed an audit of DRF management at our local emergency hospital. Results and conclusion: Despite DRF representing a large portion of our workload, there remains a paucity of evidence to base recommendations on. Recommendations can be conflicting, and some seem aspirational rather than achievable. Our local audit highlights the challenges of putting guidelines into practice. Treatment plans should incorporate best practice guidance but ultimately be individualised to each patient.

What Is the Relative Effectiveness of the Various Surgical Treatment Options for Distal Radius Fractures? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Many acceptable treatment options exist for distal radius fractures (DRFs); however, a simultaneous comparison of all methods is difficult using conventional study designs.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on DRF treatment to answer the following questions: Compared with nonoperative treatment, (1) which intervention is associated with the best 1-year functional outcome? (2) Which intervention is associated with the lowest risk of overall complications? (3) Which intervention is associated with the lowest risk of complications requiring operation?

METHODS

Ten databases were searched from inception to July 25, 2019. Search and analysis reporting adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Included studies were English-language RCTs that assessed at least one surgical treatment arm for adult patients with displaced DRFs, with less than 20% loss to follow-up. We excluded RCTs reporting on patients with open fractures, extensive bone loss, or ipsilateral upper extremity polytrauma. Seventy RCTs (n = 4789 patients) were included. Treatments compared were the volar locking plate, bridging external fixation, nonbridging external fixation, dynamic external fixation, percutaneous pinning, intramedullary fixation, dorsal plating, fragment-specific plating, and nonoperative treatment. Subgroup analyses were conducted for intraarticular fractures, extraarticular fractures, and patients with an average age greater than 60 years. Mean (range) patient age was 59 years (56 to 63) and was similar across all treatment groups except for dynamic external fixation (44 years) and fragment-specific plating (47 years). Distribution of intraarticular and extraarticular fractures was approximately equal among the treatment groups other than that for intramedullary fixation (73% extraarticular), fragment-specific plating (66% intraarticular) [13, 70], and dorsal plating (100% intraarticular). Outcomes were the DASH score at 1 year, total complications, and reoperation. The minimum clinically important different (MCID) for the DASH score was set at 10 points. The analysis was performed using Bayesian methodology with random-effects models. Rank orders were generated using surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. Evidence quality was assessed using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Most studies had a low risk of bias due to randomization and low rates of incomplete follow-up, unclear risk of bias due to selective reporting, and high risk of bias due to lack of patient and assessor blinding. Studies assessing bridging external fixation and/or nonoperative treatment arms had a higher overall risk of bias while studies with volar plating and/or percutaneous pinning treatment arms had a lower risk of bias.

RESULTS

Across all patients, there were no clinically important differences in terms of the DASH score at 1 year; although differences were found, all were less than the MCID of 10 points. Volar plating was ranked the highest for DASH score at 1 year (mean difference -7.34 [95% credible interval -11 to -3.7) while intramedullary fixation, with low-quality evidence, also showed improvement in DASH score (mean difference -7.75 [95% CI -14.6 to -0.56]). The subgroup analysis revealed that only locked volar plating was favored over nonoperative treatment for patients older than 60 years of age (mean difference -6.4 [95% CI -11 to -2.1]) and for those with intraarticular fractures (mean difference -8.4 [95% CI -15 to -2.0]). However, its clinical importance was uncertain as the MCID was not met. Among all patients, intramedullary fixation (odds ratio 0.09 [95% CI 0.02 to 0.84]) and locked volar plating (OR 0.14 [95% CI 0.05 to 0.39]) were associated with a lower complication risk compared with nonoperative treatment. For intraarticular fractures, volar plating was the only treatment associated with a lower risk of complications than nonoperative treatment (OR 0.021 [95% CI < 0.01 to 0.50]). For extraarticular fractures, only nonbridging external fixation was associated with a lower risk of complications than nonoperative treatment (OR 0.011 [95% CI < 0.01 to 0.65]), although the quality of evidence was low. Among all patients, the risk of complications requiring operation was lower with intramedullary fixation (OR 0.06 [95% CI < 0.01 to 0.85) than with nonoperative treatment, but no treatment was favored over nonoperative treatment when analyzed by subgroups.

CONCLUSION

We found no clinically important differences favoring any surgical treatment option with respect to 1-year functional outcome. However, relative to the other options, volar plating was associated with a lower complication risk, particularly in patients with intraarticular fractures, while nonbridging external fixation was associated with a lower complication risk in patients with extraarticular fractures. For patients older than 60 years of age, nonoperative treatment may still be the preferred option because there is no reliable evidence showing a consistent decrease in complications or complications requiring operation among the other treatment options. Particularly in this age group, the decision to expose patients to even a single surgery should be made with caution.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, therapeutic study.

[Research progress in the treatment of distal radius fractures assisted by wrist arthroscopy]

OBJECTIVE

To review the research progress of wrist arthroscopy assisted treatment of distal radius fractures.

METHODS

To summarize and describe the anatomical characteristics and fracture classification of the distal radius, indications and contraindications of wrist arthroscopy-assisted treatment, surgical methods, and associated soft tissue injuries, and summarize the advantages and disadvantages of the operation through a large number of literature at home and abroad on the treatment of distal radius fractures assisted by wrist arthroscopy.

RESULTS

Wrist arthroscopy as a minimally invasive technique for the treatment of distal radius fractures, compared with traditional surgery, can accurately observe intra-articular damage and perform operations under the microscope to avoid secondary damage to blood vessels, nerve, and tendon, etc., and can achieve one-stage repair and reconstruction by repairing the ligament, trigonal fibrocartilage complex, and carpal dislocation. It has the advantages of less trauma, fast postoperative recovery, extensive indications, fewer complications, and satisfactory effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Wrist arthroscopy has advantages that traditional X-ray film, CT, MRI, and arthrography examinations do not have. Moreover, wrist arthroscopy has achieved satisfactory effectiveness in the adjuvant treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures.