Cost Analysis of Intramedullary Screw versus Plate Osteosynthesis for Phalangeal and Metacarpal Fractures: An Observational Study

Metacarpal Fracture Fixation with Intramedullary Screws

Background: Intramedullary screws (IMS) have become a viable option for metacarpal fracture fixation. To further appraise their utility, this study assessed clinical and patient-reported short- and medium-term outcomes of IMS fixation for extra-articular metacarpal fractures. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed in a series of 32 patients (with a total of 37 fractures) who underwent metacarpal fracture fixation over a 42-month period between January 2020 and July 2023. Results: Mean time for return to work was 39.8 days; mean time for return to full function was 88.4 days; total active motion was 250.7° (range: 204.9-270.9); Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score was 2.3 (range: 0-22.7); mean visual analogue pain score was 0.9 out of 10 (range: 0-6) and a single complication was observed. Conclusions: The use of IMS in metacarpal fracture fixation is a practicable surgical option. IMS fixations yields a satisfactory duration for return to function, good postoperative range of movement, modest pain scores and low rates of complications. Level of Evidence: Level IV (Therapeutic).

Intramedullary Screw Fixation of Proximal Phalangeal Fractures: Short- to Medium-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Intramedullary screw fixation of phalangeal and metacarpal fractures has gained popularity as a method of providing rigid internal fixation with minimum tendon disturbance, allowing early mobilization and rehabilitation. Despite this, the literature on outcomes using this technique is limited. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the short-term to medium-term outcomes of intramedullary screw fixation for proximal phalangeal fracture fixation in an Australian setting.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with a fracture(s) of the proximal phalanx fixated using intramedullary screws between January 2020 and March 2023 was conducted via telehealth.

RESULTS

Forty-six phalangeal fractures from 37 patients were included in this study. Mean Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score of 6.2 (range: 0-61.4, median: 0), mean pain visual analogue scale score of 1.8 (range: 1-7, median: 1), and mean total active motion of 231° (range: 132-282) were noted. A total of 4.4% of fractures sustained a major complication, and 94.6% of patients reported willingness to undergo intramedullary screw fixation again.

CONCLUSION

This study concurs with the prior literature that intramedullary screw fixation is a safe and effective method of stabilizing extra-articular proximal phalangeal fractures in the short to medium term. Superior clinical outcomes, as well as cost-effectiveness and time-effectiveness, render it a viable alternative to plate fixation in this setting.

Dorsal Plating, Lateral Plating, and Intramedullary Screw Fixation of Extra-Articular Proximal Phalangeal Fractures: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Comparison

PURPOSE

To provide a biomechanical comparison of dorsal plating, lateral plating and intramedullary screw [IMS] fixation for extra-articular proximal phalangeal fractures.

METHODS

Midshaft osteotomies were performed on 36 cadaveric proximal phalanges. The phalanges were fixed by dorsal plating, lateral plating or IMS fixation, and subjected to a four-point bending force. Force was applied to achieve displacement of 1 mm/s, until construct failure or to a maximum of 10 mm of displacement. Clinical failure was defined as 2 mm of displacement, and force required to result in 1 mm and 2 mm of displacement was recorded, as was mode of failure.

RESULTS

Dorsal plating [127.5 N ± 52.6; 46.51-229.17] and lateral plating [77.1 N ± 25.1; 48.3-113.8] required significantly greater force to achieve 1 mm of displacement when compared to IMS [41.2 N ± 12.4; 20.6-62.3]. Dorsal plating [339.2 N ± 91.8; 158.5-538.6] required significantly greater force than lateral plating [154.5 N ± 33.8; 99.0 -204.4] and intramedullary screw fixation [110.0 ± 38.6; 51.1-189.3] to result in 2 mm of displacement. Lateral and dorsal plating constructs failed through plate bending, screw cut-out or plate failure, whilst IMS failed via implant deformity. All three constructs required greater force to result in even 1 mm of displacement than what is likely subjected through rehabilitation via active motion.

CONCLUSIONS

Lateral plating and IMS fixation offer sufficient stiffness to withstand the likely forces subjected via early active motion without displacement.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Dorsal plating required significantly greater force than lateral plating and intramedullary screw fixation to achieve 1 mm of displacement when used in extra-articular proximal phalangeal fractures in an in vitro setting. However, all three modalities confer enough stability to likely withstand the forces associated with active range of motion.