Does circumferential casting prevent fracture redisplacement in reduced distal radius fractures? A retrospective multicentre study

Redisplacement of reduced distal radius fractures in adults: does the type of casting play a role? The CAST study, a multicentre cluster randomized controlled trial

Aims

It is not clear which type of casting provides the best initial treatment in adults with a distal radial fracture. Given that between 32% and 64% of adequately reduced fractures redisplace during immobilization in a cast, preventing redisplacement and a disabling malunion or secondary surgery is an aim of treatment. In this study, we investigated whether circumferential casting leads to fewer the redisplacement of fewer fractures and better one-year outcomes compared with plaster splinting.

Methods

In a pragmatic, open-label, multicentre, two-period cluster-randomized superiority trial, we compared these two types of casting. Recruitment took place in ten hospitals. Eligible patients aged ≥ 18 years with a displaced distal radial fracture, which was acceptably aligned after closed reduction, were included. The primary outcome measure was the rate of redisplacement within five weeks of immobilization. Secondary outcomes were the rate of complaints relating to the cast, clinical outcomes at three months, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) (using the numerical rating scale (NRS), the abbreviated version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), and Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation (PRWHE) scores), and adverse events such as the development of compartment syndrome during one year of follow-up. We used multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression for the analysis of the primary outcome measure.

Results

The study included 420 patients. There was no significant difference between the rate of redisplacement of the fracture between the groups: 47% (n = 88) for those treated with a plaster splint and 49% (n = 90) for those treated with a circumferential cast (odds ratio 1.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.70); p = 0.854). Patients treated in a plaster splint reported significantly more pain than those treated with a circumferential cast, during the first week of treatment (estimated mean NRS 4.7 (95% CI 4.3 to 5.1) vs 4.1 (95% CI 3.7 to 4.4); p = 0.014). The rate of complaints relating to the cast, clinical outcomes and PROMs did not differ significantly between the groups (p > 0.05). Compartment syndrome did not occur.

Conclusion

Circumferential casting did not result in a significantly different rate of redisplacement of the fracture compared with the use of a plaster splint. There were comparable outcomes in both groups.

Clinical application of instant 3D printed cast versus polymer orthosis in the treatment of colles fracture: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The shortcomings of plaster in water resistance, air permeability, skin comfort, fixed stability and weight of wearing are still to be solved. 3D printed cast can overcome the above shortcomings. At present, there is a relative lack of data on the clinical application of 3D printed cast, probably due to its complexity, relatively long operating time, and high price. We aimed to compare and evaluate the short-term effectiveness, safety and advantages of 3D printed wrist cast versus polymer orthosis in the treatment of Colles fracture.

METHODS

Forty patients with Colles fracture in our hospital from June to December 2022 were selected and divided into an observation group (20 patients, treated with instant 3D printed cast) and a control group (20 cases, treated with polymer orthosis). Both groups treated with manual reduction and external fixation. The visual analogue scale (VAS), immobilization effectiveness and satisfaction scores, Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, complications and imaging data were collected and compared before immobilization and at 2, 6 and 12 weeks after the fracture.

RESULTS

VAS at 2 weeks after the fracture was significantly lower in the observation group than in the control group ( P < 0.05). The immobilization effectiveness and satisfaction scores at 6 weeks after the fracture were significantly higher in the observation group than in the control group (all P < 0.05). The DASH scores at 2 and 6 weeks after the fracture were significantly lower in the observation group than in the control group (all P < 0.05). There wasn't rupture of the printed cast or orthosis in both groups. There were 2 cases of skin irritation in the control group, and no skin irritation occurred in the observation group. The palmar tilt angle and ulnar inclination angle at 2 weeks and 12 weeks after the fracture were significantly higher in the observation group than in the control group (all P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both instant 3D printed cast and polymer orthosis are effective in the treatment of Colles fracture. But instant 3D printed cast is better than polymer orthosis in areas of good clinical and imaging performance, and high patient satisfaction and comfort.