Comparison of effects of seven treatment methods for distal radius fracture on minimizing complex regional pain syndrome

The Role of External Fixation in the Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures

There are numerous internal fixation (IF) options available for distal radius fractures (DRFs). The choice of fixation method depends on factors such as fracture morphology, soft tissue integrity, the patient's clinical status, and the surgeon's training. While volar plate fixation has become the primary approach for addressing these fractures, alternative IF methods like K-wire fixation, fragment-specific fixation, and dorsal bridge plating continue to be effective. Despite the versatility of IF, there are certain clinical situations where prompt and conclusive management through open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is not suitable. These instances include the treatment of polytraumatized patients, individuals with compromised soft tissues, or those medically unstable to tolerate lengthy anesthesia. In such cases, proficiency in closed reduction and external fixation (EF) proves invaluable. Being able to identify these clinical scenarios and comprehend the efficacy and safety of EF in addressing DRFs is valuable for any surgeon handling such injuries.

Dorsal bridging plates for the treatment of high and low energy distal radius fractures

Distal radius fractures are common and treatment of complex fracture pattens can be challenging. We assessed functional outcomes, radiographic analysis, and complications of 26 distal radius fractures treated with dorsal bridging plate (DBP) at a mean of 14 months post plate removal (6-34 months). Radiographic parameters were measured pre- and post-operatively and patient reported wrist evaluation scores, patient reported wrist range of movement and satisfaction scores. Mean post-operative total PRWE was 26 (range 0-76) and mean wrist mobility 52° flexion (range 10°-85°) and 50° extension (range 10°-85°). Mean post-operative patient satisfaction score was 89% (range 50-100%). Four patients developed complications (one EPL rupture and three developed CRPS). DBP can reliably restore distal radius anatomy and is associated with good functional outcome scores, return of functional range of wrist movement and high levels of patient satisfaction.

Level of Evidence

III.

Clinical outcomes comparison of distal radius fractures between two conservative treatment methods: Below-arm cast versus reverse sugar tong splint

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this prospective randomized study was to compare a new reverse sugar tong splint technique with a below-arm cast, in terms of patient radiological and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

One hundred and forty patients who presented to our clinic between April 2017 and March 2019 were randomly divided into two groups: 70 received reverse sugar tong (RST group) and 70 received below arm cast (BAC group). Clinical and radiological follow-up was performed 7-10 days, three weeks, 5 or 6 weeks, 12 weeks and one year after the treatment. Clinical outcomes including wrist range of motion, complication rates, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score at end of treatment, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (Q-DASH) questionnaire and Mayo Elbow Performance score (MEPS) score at 12 weeks and last follow-up.

RESULTS

Finally, sixty-five patients were treated with BAC, and their average age was 58.2 years and sixty-two patients with an average age of 57.4 years were treated with RST were completed the radiological and clinical one-year follow-up. There were no significant differences in range of motion, radiological parameters, the Q-DASH and MEPS scores between the groups the 12th week and last visit; however, the HAQ score was significantly higher in the cast group during the 6th visit (p < 0.001). The BAC group had a higher complication rate (40%) than the RST group (19.3%) (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Patient treated with RST had a higher functional status at end of treatment and lower complications when comparing traditional below arm cast.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I prognostic randomized controlled trial.

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.

Contact Pressure between Digital Flexors and Plates for Distal Radius Approaches

Background  Flexor tendon irritation or rupture following open reduction and volar plate fixation of distal radius fractures can cause significant morbidity and necessitate additional surgical intervention. Objectives  To compare the impact of the extended flexor carpi radialis (e-FCR) and standard flexor carpi radialis (FCR) approaches on contact pressures between the flexor tendons and volar distal radius plates. Methods  Eight matched pairs of fresh frozen cadavers had each limb randomized to undergo either the e-FCR or standard FCR approach. After the approach, a locking plate was applied to the volar distal radius more distally than ideally to create a worst-case scenario for the digital flexor tendons. Electronic pressure sensors were secured to the volar aspect of each locking plate. Each wrist was pinned in 20 degrees of extension during testing. Using a computer-controlled stepper motor system attached to the digital flexor and extensor tendons, the digits were taken through 4,000 cycles simulating 12 weeks of active flexion and extension. Results  There were no statistically or clinically significant differences when comparing the contact pressures of the e-FCR approach with the standard FCR approach at any time intervals. The e-FCR had statistically significantly higher radial-sided contact pressures than ulnar-sided contact pressures during early-to-intermediate testing intervals. These differences resolved at late and final testing intervals. Conclusions  When comparing the standard FCR approach with the e-FCR approach, with the wrist in 20 degrees of extension, there is no significant difference in contact pressures that occur between the digital flexor tendons and volar distal radius plates. Clinical Relevance  Further study and technique modifications may eventually lead to better methods of avoiding flexor tendon rupture during the volar plating of distal radius fractures.

Health Predictors of Pain in Elderly-A Serbian Population-Based Study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to evaluate the association of health factors with the presence and different degrees of pain in elderly above 65 years of life.

METHODS

The population-based study included 3540 individuals above 65 years of age of life from twofold stratified household sample representative for Serbia, during 2013 (the average age 73.9 ± 6.3 years; average Body Mass Index was 26.7 ± 4.4, females 56.8%, living with partner 55.5%, with primary education 55.3%, with poor wealth index 55.8% and from rural settings 46.2%). As health predictors of pain, we analyzed further health parameters: self-perceived general health, long-lasting health problems, diagnosed pulmonary disease, cardiovascular disease, musculoskeletal disease, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension and other chronic diseases. Pain domain of SF-36 version 2.0 was used for pain assessment.

RESULTS

Significant health predictors of pain were: self-perceived general health (OR 2.28), where bad perception of self-perceived general health in our study had greater risk of pain with higher degree of severity; long-lasting health problems (OR 1.60), where elderly with long-lasting health problems had almost twice the risk of moderate degree of pain, and above twice the risk for severe degree of pain; pulmonary disease (OR 1.38); musculoskeletal disease (OR 2.98) and other chronic diseases (OR 1.71). The presence of musculoskeletal disease increases the risk for pain, even more than double in severe versus mild degrees of pain.

CONCLUSION

Bad self-perceived general health, long-lasting health problems, pulmonary, musculoskeletal diseases, cardiovascular disease and other chronic disease were significant health-related predictors of various degrees of pain in elderly.

Postoperative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures Using Sensorimotor Rehabilitation

Background  Sensorimotor and specifically proprioception sense has been used in rehabilitation to treat neurological and joint injuries. These feedback loops are not well understood or implemented in wrist treatment. We observed a temporary sensorimotor loss, following distal radius fractures (DRF) that should be addressed postsurgery. Purpose  The purpose of this prospective therapeutic study was to compare the outcomes of patients following surgery for DRF treated using a sensorimotor treatment protocol with those patients treated according to the postoperative standard of care. Patients and Methods  Patients following surgery for DRF sent for hand therapy were eligible for the study. Both the evaluation and treatment protocols included a comprehensive sensorimotor panel. Patients were randomized into standard and standard plus sensorimotor postoperative therapy and were evaluated a few days following surgery, at 6 weeks, and 3 months postsurgery. Results  Sixty patients following surgery were randomized into the two treatment regimens. The initial evaluation was similar for both groups and both demonstrated significant sensorimotor deficits, following surgery for DRF. There was documented sensorimotor and functional improvement in both groups with treatment. The clinical results were better in the group treated with the sensorimotor-proprioception protocol mostly in the wrist; however, not all of the differences were significant. Conclusion  Patients after surgery for DRF demonstrate significant sensorimotor deficits which may improve faster when utilizing a comprehensive sensorimotor treatment protocol. However, we did not demonstrate efficacy of the protocol in treating proprioceptive deficits. Further study should include refinement of functional outcome evaluation, studying of the treatment protocol, and establishment of sensorimotor therapeutic guidelines for other conditions. Level of Evidence This is a level II, therapeutic study.