Plate Fixation versus Percutaneous Pinning for Unstable Metacarpal Fractures: A Meta-analysis

Complications of osteosynthesis for long-finger metacarpal and phalanx fracture

Fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges represent a significant proportion of hand fractures. Although non-operative treatment is generally effective, some fractures require surgery. Historically, osteosynthesis using K-wires was widely used, but screw plates and then cannulated intramedullary screws have emerged as therapeutic alternatives. We assessed the complications associated with the different osteosynthesis techniques: stiffness, infection, bone consolidation and hardware-related problems. Each osteosynthesis technique has advantages and disadvantages, and choice depends on several factors. An individualized approach according to patient and fracture is essential to optimize clinical results.

Percutaneous transverse pinning for metacarpal fractures: a clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Metacarpal fractures account for 25%-50% of all hand fractures and may negatively impact hand function and ability to work. Percutaneous transverse pinning of non-articular metacarpal fractures allows mobilisation immediately after the procedure.

METHODS

Between March 2017 and February 2022, 56 patients undergoing percutaneous transverse pinning for unstable metacarpal fractures were prospectively recruited. We investigated surgical outcomes in terms of Patient-rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) and pre-and post-operative radiographic evaluation. The Student t-test was used to compare the means of PRWHE values after surgery. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The mean age was 40.21 ± 17.9 years (range of 16 to 86 years). The average operating time was 27.96 min. The mean follow-up period was 14.3 ± 6.4 months (from 2 to 41 months). The mean PRWHE score was 6.5 ± 1.8. None of the patients had clinically observable rotational deformities, and the functional outcomes were satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous transverse pinning for non-articular metacarpal fractures restores excellent function, and imaging results are satisfactory. Further high-quality clinical trials are required to validate these results on a larger scale.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, prospective cohort study.

The Treatment of Closed Finger and Metacarpal Fractures

BACKGROUND

Fractures of the fingers and metacarpal bones are the most common fracture type in the upper limb, with an incidence of 114 to 1483 per 100 000 persons per year. The clinical importance of closed finger and metacarpal fractures is often underestimated; inadequate diagnostic and therapeutic measures may result in serious harm. This review concerns the basic elements of the diagnosis and treatment of finger and metacarpal fractures.

METHODS

This review of the incidence, diagnosis and treatment of finger and metacarpal fractures is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search of the literature.

RESULTS

The main focus of treatment lies on restoration of hand function in consideration of the requirements of the individual patient. The currently available evidence provides little guidance to optimal treatment (level II evidence). Although most closed fractures can be managed conservatively, individualized surgical treatment is advisable in comminuted fractures and fractures with a relevant degree of torsional malposition, axis deviation, or shortening, as well as in intra-articular fractures. Minimally invasive techniques are, in principle, to be performed wherever possible, yet open surgery is sometimes needed because of fracture morphology. Postsurgical complication rates are in the range of 32-36%, with joint fusion accounting for 67-76% of the complications. 15% involve delayed fracture healing and pseudarthrosis.

CONCLUSION

Individualized treatment for finger and metacarpal fractures can improve patients' outcomes, with major socioeconomic and societal benefits. Further high-quality studies evaluating the relative merits of the available treatments are needed as a guide to optimized therapy.

Intramedullary K-wires versus Alternate Techniques for Metacarpal Shaft and Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Intramedullary K-wire (IMKW) fixation is one of the mainstays for surgically treating metacarpal shaft and neck fractures. However, there remains a lack of literature comparing outcomes of the various available surgical repair techniques in all indicated metacarpals. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the clinical advantages and drawbacks of IMKW compared with alternate fracture repair techniques. A comprehensive systematic literature review was performed to identify studies that compared clinical outcomes of IMKW to alternate metacarpal fixation modalities. Outcomes included Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH/ quick DASH) scores, grip strength, union rate, visual analog scale pain, operative time, and complications. A random-effects model was used to compare IMKW to the pooled effect of other fixation techniques. A total of 10 studies were included in our analysis, comprising 497 metacarpal fractures (220 shafts and 277 necks). IMKW fixation was identified as the control group in all studies. The pooled experimental group included plates, transverse K-wires (TKWs), interfragmentary screws (IFSs), and K-wire cross-pinning (CP). In treating metacarpal shaft fractures, IMKW showed significantly shorter operative time ( p  = 0.04; mean difference = - 13; 95% confidence interval = -26 to -0.64). No significant differences were observed in treating metacarpal neck fractures for disability, grip strength, healing rate, pain, operative time, or complication rate. This systematic review and meta-analysis found no difference in clinical outcomes among various surgical techniques for treating metacarpal shaft and neck fractures. Further high evidence studies are required that investigate the efficacy and safety of IFS, CP, TKW, and intramedullary screws versus IMKW for treating closed, unstable metacarpal fractures.

Single Buried Intramedullary K-Wire Fixation in Nonthumb Metacarpal Shaft Fractures with Immediate Postoperative Mobilization without Any Immobilization

Objective

This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of single intramedullary K-wire fixation in nonthumb, metacarpal shaft fractures with immediate postoperative hand mobilization without any immobilization.

Method

This is a retrospective case series conducted from January 2019 to December 2022. We included patients with closed, simple transverse, or short oblique metacarpal shaft fracture treated with single, 1.4 mm, intramedullary K-wire fixation. Gentle postoperative range of motion exercise was encouraged in every patient without any hand, finger, or wrist motion restriction material. Clinical outcomes were evaluated with total active flexion; grip strength; disability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score; and the American Society for Surgery of the Hand Total Active Flexion (ASSH TAF) score.

Results

This study included 34 patients, 25 males and 9 females with a mean age of 33.14 years (ranging 18-59). A total of 43 metacarpal shafts were treated. The mean DASH score at two and 6 weeks postoperative was 41.5 (ranging 19.16-60.34) and 9.58 (ranging 0.83-23.27). The mean final DASH score at last follow-up was 3.48 (ranging 0-8.33). Mean TAF at 2 weeks postoperative, 6 weeks postoperative, and at final follow-up was 203.8 (ranging 185-240), 238.2 (ranging 220-270), and 259.25 (ranging 240-270) degrees, respectively. The mean grip strength of the injured hand was 66.14 and 86.1% of the uninjured hand at 6 weeks and 3 months postoperative. There was no nonunion, malrotation, or infection. In conclusion, single intramedullary K-wire fixation gives excellent outcomes in the treatment of single or multiple, simple, metacarpal shaft fractures without the need of postoperative immobilization.

Intramedullary Metacarpal Fracture Fixation: A Biomechanical Study of Screw Diameter and Comparison With Intramedullary Wire Stabilization

PURPOSE

Interest in intramedullary metacarpal fracture fixation (IMFF) with screws is increasing. However, the optimal screw diameter for fracture fixation is not yet established. In theory, larger screws should be more stable, but there is concern about long-term sequelae of larger metacarpal head defects and extensor mechanism injury created during insertion as well as implant cost. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare different diameter screws for IMFF to a popular and more cost-effective alternative of intramedullary wiring.

METHODS

Thirty-two cadaveric metacarpals were used in a transverse metacarpal shaft fracture model. Treatment groups consisted of IMFF with 3.0 × 60 mm, 3.5 x 60 mm, and 4.5 x 60 mm screws as well as 4 1.1-mm intramedullary wires. Cyclic cantilever bending was performed with the metacarpals mounted at 45° to simulate physiologic loading. Cyclical loading at 10, 20, and 30 N was performed to determine fracture displacement, stiffness, and ultimate force.

RESULTS

At 10, 20, and 30 N of cyclical loading, all screw diameters tested provided similar stability as measured by fracture displacement and were superior to the wire group. However, ultimate force under load to failure testing was similar between the 3.5- and 4.5-mm screws and superior to 3.0-mm screws and wires.

CONCLUSIONS

For IMFF, 3.0, 3.5, and 4.5-mm diameter screws provide adequate stability for early active motion and are superior to wires. When comparing the different screw diameters, 3.5- and 4.5-mm diameter screws offer similar construct stability and strength superior to the 3.0-mm diameter screw. Therefore, to minimize metacarpal head morbidity, smaller screw diameters may be preferable.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study suggests that IMFF with screws is biomechanically superior to wires in cantilever bending strength in the transverse fracture model. However, smaller screws may be sufficient to permit early active motion while minimizing metacarpal head morbidity.

Retrograde Intramedullary Screw Fixation for Metacarpal Fractures: A Systematic Review

Common forms of fixation of metacarpal fractures have historically included percutaneous Kirschner wire fixation, plates and screws, and, more recently, intramedullary screw fixation. Retrograde intramedullary screws (RISs) are a novel modality first described 10 years ago. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate the published literature assessing outcomes of RIS fixation for metacarpal fractures and create a complication profile for this novel technique. A comprehensive literature search was performed using electronic databases for both clinical and biomechanical studies in relation to RIS fixation published from 2000 to 2020. A total of 19 studies (13 clinical and 6 biomechanical) met the inclusion criteria. The clinical studies examined 603 metacarpal fractures and demonstrated adequate functional outcomes in terms of grip strength, total active motion, and time to return to work. The biomechanical studies examined 80 metacarpal fractures, finding that load to failure in RISs was often equal to or higher than Kirschner wires but less than plate and screws. The complication rate in reviewed studies was 2.8%, with the most prevalent complications being stiffness and extension lag. RIS use in metacarpal fractures appears to provide adequate stability with satisfactory clinical outcomes and minimal complications, although more high-quality studies are needed to fully examine this modality.

A Systematic Review of Treatment Interventions for Metacarpal Shaft Fractures in Adults

Metacarpal shaft fractures are common hand injuries that predominantly affect younger patients. There is wide variability in their treatment with no consensus on best practice. We performed a systematic review to assess the breadth and quality of available evidence supporting different treatment modalities for metacarpal shaft fractures of the finger digits in adults. A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A total of 1600 records were identified; 7 studies fulfilled eligibility criteria and were included. No randomized controlled trials directly comparing surgery with nonsurgical treatment were found. One retrospective study compared nonsurgical with surgical treatment, whereas 6 compared surgical or nonsurgical treatments. Considerable heterogeneity between studies along with a high or critical risk of bias restricts direct comparison and conclusions. There is a lack of high-quality evidence to guide treatment, supporting the need for well-designed, multicenter trials to identify the most effective and cost-efficient treatment for metacarpal shaft fractures in adults.

Internal Fixation of Finger Fractures: Field Sterility for Surgery and Earlier Removal of K-Wires Are Safe

Field sterility for K-wire insertion outside the main operating room is much cheaper and greener (ie, there is less waste). It permits increased access to more affordable surgery because unnecessary sedation and full sterility are eliminated. Early pain-guided protected movement of K-wired finger fractures at 3 to 5 days leads to less stiffness. It will not result in loss of reduction or infection around K-wires if patients avoid "pain" (ie, do not perform movements that hurt). Early protected movement and early removal of K-wires at 2 to 4 weeks contribute to less stiffness after operative hand/finger fracture reduction and stabilization.

A comparison of intramedullary cannulated screws versus miniplates for fixation of unstable metacarpal diaphyseal fractures

We carried out a prospective randomized study to compare the clinical and radiological results of metacarpal diaphyseal fractures treated with retrograde intramedullary headless cannulated screws (IHCS) and plates. Fractures were fixed with IHCS in 34 patients (37 metacarpals) and locked miniplates in 35 patients (40 metacarpals). The mean age was 33 years (range 18-61) in the IHCS group and 32 years (range 17-68) in plate group. All patients were followed up for 1 year. All fractures in the IHCS group united but there was one nonunion in the plate group. At final follow-up, there was no significant difference between the groups in total active movement, visual analogue pain score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score and grip strength, although the study was not sufficiently powered to exclude differences with certainty. IHCS is a safe and fast technique that is a good alternative to plate fixation in metacarpal diaphyseal fractures.Level of evidence: I.

Factors affecting healing following percutaneous intramedullary fixation of metacarpal fractures

Although percutaneous intramedullary nailing of metacarpal fractures is a straightforward and reliable technique, it is not without complications, and patients experience different outcomes. This study analyzed factors affecting fracture healing time and complication rates in patients who underwent percutaneous intramedullary fixation of metacarpal fractures.This study was a retrospective review of the 25 patients who underwent retrograde percutaneous Kirschner wire (K-wire) nailing for fracture of the metacarpal shaft or neck at a military hospital between May 2016 and October 2018. Correlation study and multiple regression analysis were performed to evaluate variables (age, smoking history in pack-years, body-mass index, fracture site, number of K-wires used) that affect time to bone union. Clinical features of patients with metacarpal neck fractures and those with metacarpal shaft fractures were also compared.The metacarpal shaft fractures (as opposed to metacarpal neck fractures) and higher number of K-wire used were associated with longer time to bone union. Mean union time was significantly longer for metacarpal shaft fracture (8.6 weeks) than for metacarpal neck fracture (6.1 weeks) and for patients who received more K-wires than for those who received less (regression coefficient 1.307). One patient suffered fixation failure and required revision operation, and another experienced superficial infection which was treated with intravenous antibiotics.Percutaneous intramedullary nailing is an effective technique for metacarpal fractures, but fracture site and number of K-wire used affect time to achieve bone union.

How to Manage Complications Related to the Use of Intramedullary Screws in Metacarpal Fractures: Case Series

The use of intramedullary screws has been increasing among hand surgeons in cases of metacarpal fractures due to their low morbidity, and because they minimize incisions and dissection, and require less tissue manipulation and deperiostization. However, there are few published articles on the complications that arise from its use. Therefore, the purpose of the current study is to present a series of cases of complications following the use of intramedullary screws in metacarpal fractures that required surgical intervention, and to describe the surgical technique used to solve them .

Methods We performed a retrospective multicenter study in which we reviewed the clinical history, surgical descriptions and radiographs of the patients submitted to fixation of intramedullary compression screws for metacarpal fractures. We defined as complications infection, lesion to the extensor apparatus, bending of the implant, loss of reduction, hardware failure, malrotation, and non-union.

Results Out of a total of 45 patients, we reported 3 cases of complication: 1 patient with loss of reduction, and 2 patients with bending of the implant. In the three cases, the screw was removed without complications, and the focus of the fracture was stabilized.

Conclusion Intramedullary fixation with compression screws is increasingly being used for metacarpal fractures, with reports of low rates of complications. In the series of cases herein reported, the complications were solved without difficulty, and the patients showed a good recovery in hand function in the follow-up. Knowledge of the possible complications and their management enables us to provide more safety to the patient at the time of choosing this technique.

Comparison of clinical and radiological results of fixation methods with retrograde intramedullary Kirschner wire and plate-screw in extra-articular metacarpal fractures

OBJECTIVES

In this study, we aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of retrograde intramedullary Kirschner-wire (K-wire) fixation with those of plate-screw (PS) fixation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 98 metacarpal shaft fractures in 75 patients (65 males, 10 females; mean age: 31.2±10.9 years; range, 16 to 65 years) were included between January 2011 and December 2017. The total joint active range of motion (AROM) and grip strength of the healthy and broken hands were evaluated. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) scores were recorded. We compared surgery duration, number of fluoroscopy images, and cost-effectiveness for each technique.

RESULTS

The overall mean follow-up was 21.9 (range, 12 to 56) months. At the last follow-up, total joint AROM (p=0.072), VAS score (p=0.298), QuickDASH score (p=0.132), and hand grip strength (p=0.947) were similar between the groups. Radiological union occurred in the PS and K-wire groups in a mean of 5.84 (range, 3 to 8) and 4.46 (range, 3 to 20) weeks, respectively (p=0.173). A significant difference was found in surgery duration (p=0.021) and number of fluoroscopy images (p<0.05) between the PS and K-wire groups. Two wound complications were observed in the PS group and one with K-wires.

CONCLUSION

Retrograde intramedullary K-wire fixation has certain advantages such as being less invasive and more accessible with shorter operation time, compared to PS fixation. Similar radiological and clinical scores can be obtained in patients undergoing retrograde intramedullary K-wire fixation or PS fixation.

Intramedullary screw fixation of metacarpal and phalangeal fractures - A systematic review of 837 patients

Intramedullary screw (IMS) fixation is increasingly used as an alternative treatment option in metacarpal and phalangeal fractures of the hand. However, this technique is currently the subject of controversy among hand surgeons. The aim of this systematic review was to gain insight on radiological, functional and patient-rated outcomes reported in literature. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL databases was conducted on March 1st, 2021. All studies reporting on fracture union, complications, and functional and patient-rated outcome in IMS fixation of metacarpal and/or phalangeal fractures were selected. Two prospective and 16 retrospective cohort studies were included, encompassing a total of 837 patients with 958 fractures (693 metacarpal, 222 proximal phalangeal and 43 middle phalangeal). Mean surgery duration was 26.4 min (range 5-60 min). Union was ultimately achieved in all fractures in a mean of 5.7 weeks (range 2-12 weeks). The procedure-related complication rate was 3.2%. The most frequently reported complication was limitation of joint motion, occurring in 2.0% of cases. Incidence of other complications, including loss of reduction, infection and screw protrusion did not exceed 1%. Overall mean total active motion averaged 243° and grip strength reached 97.5% of the contralateral side. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score averaged 3.7 points. Duration of sick leave was 7.3 weeks. According to the findings of this systematic review, IMS fixation is a time-saving and safe minimally invasive solution for both metacarpal and phalangeal fractures, with a low rate of complications and promising functional and patient-rated results.

Pin vs plate fixation for metacarpal fractures: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The differences in the clinical and functional outcomes of closed reduction and percutaneous pin fixation and open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) using plate and screws have been systematically synthesized by one meta-analysis. With newer studies being published, an effort to update the earlier meta-analysis is necessary.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches were done systematically through PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and Google scholar databases. Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, prospective comparative non-randomized studies, and even studies reporting findings from retrospective chart review were eligible to be included. Statistical analysis was done using STATA version 13.0. GRADE assessment was done to assess the quality of pooled evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 9 studies were included. The pooled estimates did not suggest any significant differences in the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score [WMD - 0.77; 95% CI, - 3.55, 2.00; I² = 75.5%], range of movement (ROM) of the metacarpophalangeal joint (^o) [WMD 4.44; 95% CI, - 4.19, 13.07; I² = 86.0%], and grip strength [WMD - 4.63; 95% CI, - 14.52, 5.26; I² = 86.9%] among the two intervention modalities. No difference was seen in the risk of complications between the two interventions (RR 0.93; 95% CI, 0.57, 1.53; I² = 31.2%). For all the outcomes, the quality of pooled evidence was judged as low to very low.

CONCLUSION

No significant long-term differences were noted in the functional outcomes suggesting that both these techniques are comparable. The choice of modality should be made based on the skills and preference of the surgeon and availability of resources.

Extra-articular Metacarpal Fractures: Closed Reduction and Percutaneous Pinning Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the optimal operative treatment of isolated closed metacarpal fractures as every technique is associated with advantages and shortcomings. This retrospective study aims to compare the outcomes of single metacarpal, extra-articular fractures treated with closed reduction and percutaneous pinning (CRPP) versus open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF).

METHODS

The charts of all patients who underwent surgical repair of closed metacarpal fractures at our institutions from 2009 to 2016 were reviewed. 70 patients met the inclusion criteria, 44 had undergone CRPP and 26 ORIF with plate or lag screws. Subgroup analyses of all patients stratified by both fracture pattern and fracture location were performed. Additionally, subgroup analyses of outcomes based on the time from injury to surgery were conducted. Clinical outcomes included immobilization time, total active motion, stiffness, complication and reoperation rates, as well as occupational therapy referral rates and duration. Functional outcomes were determined using the Quick-DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) score via telephone questionnaire administered retrospectively.

RESULTS

Overall, there was no significant difference in functional outcome parameters including total active motion (CRPP 91% of normal vs. ORIF 87% of normal), stiffness, therapy referrals, and complications between treatment groups. Patients treated with CRPP, regardless of fracture pattern or location, were operated on earlier than those treated with ORIF (avg. 7 days vs. 15 days). The immobilization time for patients treated with ORIF was significantly less than those treated with CRPP (19.7 vs. 30.7 days; p=0.001). This difference in the immobilization time also reflected the outcomes of the subgroup analyses based on the post-injury time of surgery. When transverse shaft fractures were examined independently as a subgroup, ORIF resulted in improved post-operative range of motion vs. CRPP (100% normal vs. 91% normal). The mean DASH score for each group was satisfactory and the difference was not statistically significant (16.3 for the CRPP and 18.7 for the ORIF group, p=0.805).

CONCLUSION

Both CRPP and ORIF are viable techniques with good clinical outcomes and low complication rates. ORIF of closed metacarpal fractures allowed for earlier mobilization when compared with CRPP without compromising fracture stability, clinical or functional short-term outcomes.

A Comparison of Locking Plates and Intramedullary Pinning for Fixation of Metacarpal Shaft Fractures

BACKGROUND

Metacarpal shaft fractures that necessitate surgery are frequently fixated with either intramedullary pins or plates and screws. This study compared outcome measurements of these two techniques.

METHODS

Patients operated on for closed shaft fractures of metacarpals 2-5 were examined at least 1 year after injury. All fractures were fixated by pinning between years 2013 and 2015 and by locking plates and screws between 2016 and 2017. Evaluation included range of motion measurements for all fingers compared with the contralateral hand; comparison of grip strength; finger alignment and rotation; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score; and radiographic measurements of fracture reduction and healing.

RESULTS

Thirty patients with 39 fractured metacarpals treated by pinning were compared with 29 patients with 35 fractured metacarpals treated by locking plate and screws. Both groups had similar characteristics and preoperative fracture patterns on radiograph. Patients in the plate group were found to have significantly improved outcomes in total range of motion of the operated digits (loss of 4° extension, 10° flexion, and 14° total vs 10° extension, 19° flexion, and 29° total), grip strength (93% vs 83% of contralateral hand), rotational deformity (5 digits, 1° vs 15 digits, 6°), and DASH score (10.5 vs 15.6). Radiographic bone healing time (59 vs 50 days) and operative time (58 vs 41 minutes) were both significantly longer in fractures fixated by plates.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixation with locking plates allows earlier mobilization without need for splinting. Our study supports the use of this method over intramedullary pinning for metacarpal shaft fractures.