Article

Comparison of angle stable plate fixation approaches for distal radius fractures.

Klinik für Unfallchirurgie und Orthopädie, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik Ludwigshafen, Unfallchirurgische Klinik an der Universität Heidelberg, Ludwig-Guttmann Strasse 13, D-67071 Ludwigshafen, Germany.
Injury (Impact Factor: 2.46). 12/2010; 42(4):385-92. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.10.010
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of the study was to compare radiological and functional outcomes between volar and dorsal surgical fixation of distal radius fractures using low-profile, fixed-angle implants.
A total of 305 distal radius fracture patients were treated with Synthes locking compression plate (LCP) 2.4- or 3.5-mm fixation using either a volar (n=266) or dorsal (n=39) approach. The patients were examined at 6 months, 1 and 2 years for radiological assessment of fracture healing, alignment, reduction and arthritis, as well as the determination of various functional outcome scores.
Both groups were comparable with respect to baseline and injury characteristics. The complication rate was higher for the volar approach (15%). No significant differences were observed for Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36) scores, pain, arthritis grade, grip strength and radiological measurements. However, a significantly better functional outcome represented by a low mean Gartland and Werley score was observed for the volar approach after 6 and 12 months. Significantly higher percentages of dorsal extension, palmar flexion, ulnar deviation and supination angle (relative to the mean contralateral healthy wrist) were also reported for volar approach patients at the 6-month follow-up.
Volar internal fixation of distal radius fractures with LCP DR implants can result in earlier and better functional outcome compared with the dorsal approach, yet is associated with a higher incidence of complications. After 2 years, these differences are no longer observed between the two surgical methods.

0 Followers
 · 
118 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCS) has issued guidance regarding the use of reoperation rates in the revalidation of UK-based orthopaedic surgeons. Currently, little has been published concerning acceptable rates of reoperation following primary surgical management of orthopaedic trauma, particularly with reference to revalidation. A retrospective review was conducted of patients undergoing clearly defined reoperations following primary surgical management of trauma between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2011. A full case note review was undertaken to establish the demographics, clinical course and context of reoperation. A review of the imaging was performed to establish whether the procedure performed was in line with accepted trauma practice and whether the technical execution was acceptable. A total of 3,688 patients underwent primary procedures within the time period studied while 70 (1.90%, 99% CI: 1.39-2.55) required an unplanned reoperation. Thirty-nine (56%) of these patients were male. The mean age of patients was 56 years (range: 18-98 years) and there was a median time to reoperation of 50 days (IQR: 13-154 days). Potentially avoidable reoperations occurred in 41 patients (58.6%, 99% CI: 43.2-72.6). This was largely due to technical errors (40 patients, 57.1%, 99% CI: 41.8-71.3), representing 1.11% (99% CI: 0.73-1.64) of the total trauma workload. Within RCS guidelines, 28-day reoperation rates for hip, wrist and ankle fractures were 1.4% (99% CI: 0.5-3.3), 3.5% (99% CI: 0.8%-12.1) and 1.86% (99% CI: 0.4-6.6) respectively. We present novel work that has established baseline reoperation rates for index procedures required for revalidation of orthopaedic surgeons.
    Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England 01/2015; 97(1):40-5. DOI:10.1308/003588414X14055925059318 · 1.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Fractures of the distal radius are common injuries in both athletes and nonathletes. Management is dictated by the nature of the fracture and the patient's level of competition, age, and sport-specific demands. Treatment strategies range from nonoperative treatment for stable injuries to primarily operative treatment for unstable fractures, particularly in active athletes. Once the decision has been made to treat a distal radius fracture operatively, a wide variety of fixation options are available. However, no technique has proven superior to all others, and no single method of fixation will lead to acceptable results in all types of distal radius fractures. This study will highlight important considerations when treating distal radius fractures in athletes, describe the various fixation options available, and discuss our method for determining the fixation needs of each fracture.
    Sports medicine and arthroscopy review 03/2014; 22(1):29-38. DOI:10.1097/JSA.0000000000000003 · 1.98 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: There is no established outcome measure designated as the superior measure when evaluating the results of distal radius fracture management. Although there are many used in the literature, there are only a few that have been validated to specifically predict recovery after a distal radius fracture. Additionally, there are few comparative trials that attempt to directly measure the predictive abilities of specific outcome measures. This article discusses the common scales and scores used to measure the functional recovery after distal radius fracture management and provides evidence-based literature to assess the reliability of these measures to predict outcomes.
    Hand clinics 05/2012; 28(2):165-75. DOI:10.1016/j.hcl.2012.03.003 · 1.07 Impact Factor