Comparison between cast immobilization versus volar locking plate fixation of distal radius fractures in active elderly patients, the Asian perspective

Distal radius fractures after 75 years of age: are six-month functional and radiological outcomes better with plate fixation than with conservative treatment?

BACKGROUND

Surgery and non-operative treatment produce similar 1-year functional outcomes in patients older than 65 years. Data are lacking for patients older than 75 years. The main objective of this study was to compare surgical vs. non-operative treatment regarding short-term outcomes in patients older than 75 years. In addition to an overall analysis, sub-group analyses were done in patients with displacement and severe displacement (>20 ° posterior tilt).

HYPOTHESIS

Surgery provides better clinical and radiological outcomes than does non-operative treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients older than 75 years at the time of a distal radius fracture were included prospectively over a 2-year period. A follow-up duration of at least 6 months was required. Treatment choices were based on displacement, Charlson's Co-morbidity Index, and patient autonomy. Surgery consisted in open fixation using an anterior locking plate and non-operative treatment in a short arm cast without reduction. The main assessment was based on clinical criteria: range of motion, strength, visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, the short version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand tool (QuickDASH), the Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The secondary assessment criteria were the radiological outcomes and the complications.

RESULTS

74 patients were included, among whom 24 were treated surgically and 50 non-operatively. At 1.5 months, surgery was associated with significantly better results for flexion, ulnar inclination, and supination, with range increases of at least 7 ° vs. non-operative treatment, and with greater dorsal angle and ulnar variance values (p < 0.05 for all comparisons). At 6 months, pronation and the radio-ulnar index were better with surgery (p < 0.05 for both comparisons). In the patients with displacement or severe displacement, surgery was associated with 10° gains vs. conservative treatment for flexion, ulnar inclination, and supination at 1.5 months (p < 0.05 for all comparisons).

DISCUSSION

In patients older than 75 years, surgery for distal radius fracture was associated with significantly better clinical and radiological outcomes within 6 months. Surgery is recommended for displaced and severely displaced distal radius fractures to expedite the recovery of joint motion ranges. Beyond 6 months, the outcomes are similar.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Surgical vs. Conservative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures in the Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Elderly patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs) pose a significant medical challenge due to their high incidence and related healthcare costs. Both surgical methods like volar plate fixation and conservative approaches such as casting are common, yet their relative effectiveness remains unclear. This review and meta-analysis compare surgical and conservative treatments, focusing on wrist functionality, upper extremity performance, grip strength, and pain after one year. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science up to November 6, 2024, to find randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for DRFs in patients aged 65 and older. Thirteen RCTs with 2400 participants were included. After one year, there was no significant difference in wrist function between groups (mean difference (MD)=-1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.61 to 0.13; p=0.78; I²=78%), but upper limb function favored surgery as measured by the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score (MD=-2.32; 95% CI -3.66 to -0.98; p=0.0007; I²=83%). Surgical treatment significantly improved grip strength (MD=3.82; 95% CI 1.55 to 6.09; p=0.001) but resulted in higher pain levels (MD=2.73; 95% CI 1.16 to 4.31; p=0.0007). Results showed substantial heterogeneity and publication bias. Surgical treatment offers slight functional advantages in grip strength and DASH scores but is associated with higher pain; conservative treatment remains viable with minimal differences in long-term wrist function. Further high-quality studies are necessary to address heterogeneity and publication bias.

Non-surgical vs. surgical treatment of distal radius fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes between nonsurgical and surgical treatment of distal radius fracture.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search by using multiple databases, including Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane. All databases were searched from the earliest records through February 2023. The study compared nonsurgical versus surgical treatment of distal radius fractures and included only randomized controlled trials (RCTS).

RESULTS

There were seventeen randomized controlled trials retrieved. A total of 1730 patients were included: 862 in the nonsurgical group and 868 in the surgical group. The results showed a significant reduction in DASH score with surgical treatment (WMD 3.98, 95% CI (2.00, 5.95), P < 0.001). And in grip strength (%), the results showed a significant improvement in surgical treatment compared with non-surgical treatment (WMD - 6.60, 95% CI (-11.61, -1.60), P = 0.01). There was significant difference in radial inclination, radial length, volar title, range of wrist pronation, range of wrist supination. However, no difference in radial deviation, ulnar deviation, ulnar variance, range of wrist extension and range of wrist flexion was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that some patients with surgical treatment of distal radius fractures not only improved the grip strength (%), decreased the DASH score, but also improved the range of wrist pronation and the range of wrist supination compared with nonsurgical treatment. Based on the present meta-analysis, we suggest that some patients with surgical treatment might be more effective in patients with distal radius fracture.

Analysis of factors influencing hospitalization cost of patients with distal radius fractures: an empirical study based on public traditional Chinese medicine hospitals in two cities, China

BACKGROUND

Distal radius fractures (DRFs) have become a public health problem for all countries, bringing a heavier economic burden of disease globally, with China's disease economic burden being even more acute due to the trend of an aging population. This study aimed to explore the influencing factors of hospitalization cost of patients with DRFs in traditional Chinese medicine (TCMa) hospitals to provide a scientific basis for controlling hospitalization cost.

METHODS

With 1306 cases of DRFs patients hospitalized in 15 public TCMa hospitals in two cities of Gansu Province in China from January 2017 to 2022 as the study object, the influencing factors of hospitalization cost were studied in depth gradually through univariate analysis, multiple linear regression, and path model.

RESULTS

Hospitalization cost of patients with DRFs is mainly affected by the length of stay, surgery and operation, hospital levels, payment methods of medical insurance, use of TCMa preparations, complications and comorbidities, and clinical pathways. The length of stay is the most critical factor influencing the hospitalization cost, and the longer the length of stay, the higher the hospitalization cost.

CONCLUSIONS

TCMa hospitals should actively take advantage of TCMb diagnostic modalities and therapeutic methods to ensure the efficacy of treatment and effectively reduce the length of stay at the same time, to lower hospitalization cost. It is also necessary to further deepen the reform of the medical insurance payment methods and strengthen the construction of the hierarchical diagnosis and treatment system, to make the patients receive reasonable reimbursement for medical expenses, thus effectively alleviating the economic burden of the disease in the patients with DRFs.

Are Observational Studies on Distal Radius Fracture Treatment Robust? An E-value Approach to Analysis

BACKGROUND

Reported complication frequencies after distal radius fracture (DRF) treatment vary widely in the literature and are based mostly on observational evidence. Whether that evidence is sufficiently robust to use in practice is controversial. The E-value is an innovative sensitivity analysis that quantitates the robustness of observational evidence against unmeasured confounders, whereby a greater E-value usually implies more robust evidence and vice versa; with DRF complications, this approach can help guide readers to a more confident interpretation of the available evidence.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this study, we sought (1) to compare the complication frequencies among different DRF treatment modalities, and (2) to evaluate the robustness of these observational studies using the E-value as an index for unmeasured confounding.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and SCOPUS for observational studies on the management of DRFs that were published from January 2001 to July 2021 with the last database search performed on July 31, 2021. All articles that compared different DRF treatment modalities with reported complication frequencies were included to accurately capture the quality of the observational studies in research about DRF. Risk ratios (RRs) of the overall complication and major complication risks were calculated for each subgroup comparison: volar plating versus dorsal plating, casting, external fixation, and percutaneous K-wire fixation. The RRs and their corresponding lower limits of the 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to derive the E-values. E-values can have a minimum possible value of 1, which signifies that the treatment-outcome association is not strong and can readily be overturned by unmeasured confounders. By contrast, a large E-value means that the observed treatment-outcome association is robust against unmeasured confounders. We averaged RRs and E-values for the effect estimates and lower limits of CIs across studies in each treatment comparison group. We identified 36 comparative observational studies that met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies compared volar with dorsal plating techniques. Volar plating was also compared with casting (eight studies), external fixation (15 studies), and percutaneous K-wire fixation (six studies).

RESULTS

Total and major complication risks did not differ among different DRF treatments. The mean RRs for total and major complications were 1.2 (95% CI 0.4 to 3.9; p = 0.74) and 1.8 (95% CI 0.4 to 11.4; p = 0.52) for the volar versus dorsal plating group; 1.2 (95% CI 0.3 to 11.2; p = 0.87) and 1.5 (95% CI 0.3 to 14.9; p = 0.74) for the volar plating versus casting group; 0.6 (95% CI 0.2 to 2.2; p = 0.33) and 0.8 (95% CI 0.2 to 6.7; p = 0.86) for the volar plating versus external fixation group; and 0.6 (95% CI 0.2 to 2.6; p = 0.47) and 0.7 (95% CI 0.2 to 4.0; p = 0.67) for the volar plating versus K-wire fixation group. The mean E-values for total and major complication frequencies for the between-group comparison ranged from 3.1 to 5.8; these were relatively large in the context of a known complication risk factor, such as high-energy impact (RR 3.2), suggesting a reasonable level of robustness against unmeasured confounding. However, the E-values for lower limits of CIs remained close to 1, which indicates the observed complication frequencies in these studies were likely to have been influenced by unmeasured confounders.

CONCLUSION

Complication frequencies did not differ among different DRF treatment modalities, but the observed complication frequencies from most comparative observational studies were less robust against potential unmeasured confounders. The E-value method, or another type of sensitivity analysis, should be implemented in observational hand surgery research at the individual-study level to facilitate assessment of robustness against potential unmeasured confounders.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Does the surgical treatment of concomitant upper limb fractures affect the outcomes of hip fractures in the elderly population?

INTRODUCTION

Elderly patients with concomitant upper limb and hip fractures present a management dilemma because upper limb fractures potentially affect rehabilitation outcomes for the hip fracture. This study aims to evaluate whether the site of upper limb fractures and the decision to surgically treat such fractures affect the functional outcome of surgically treated hip fracture patients.

METHODOLOGY

We retrospectively reviewed 1828 hip fracture patients treated at a single trauma centre over 3 years, of whom 42 with surgically treated hip fractures had concomitant upper limb fractures. Outcome measures, such as length of hospital stay, complications, mortality and readmission rates, were assessed, whilst the functional outcomes were evaluated using the Modified Barthel Index (MBI) on admission, post-operatively and at 6 and 12 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Amongst the 42 patients with surgically treated hip fractures, 31.0% had proximal humerus fractures, 50.0% had wrist fractures, 16.7% had elbow fractures and 2.4% had forearm fractures. 50.0% of these upper limb fractures were treated surgically. There was no difference in complications, inpatient morbidity, readmission rates or the length of hospital stay for patients whose upper limb fractures were surgically treated as compared to those non-surgically treated. There was no difference in absolute MBI scores at 6 and 12 months based on the management of upper limb fractures. However, patients with surgically treated wrist fractures had statistically significant higher MBI scores at 6 months as compared to those treated non-surgically.

CONCLUSION

Surgical treatment of concomitant upper limb fractures does not appear to change the outcomes of the hip fractures. Hip fracture patients with surgically treated wrist fractures had better functional outcomes at 6 months compared to those treated non-surgically; however, there was no difference at 12 months. Hip fracture patients with concomitant wrist fractures had better functional outcomes compared to hip fracture patients with proximal humerus fractures.

Clinical and functional analysis of closed reduction-plastering and volar locking plate methods in distal radius fractures in patients over 60 years of age

Aim: Many different methods have been described in the treatment of distal radius fractures (DRF) in the elderly population, and which one is the better method is a matter of debate among orthopedic surgeons. The aim of this study was to compare the results of closed reduction and plastering (CRP) and volar locking plate (VLP), which are used in the treatment of DRF in the elderly population. Materials and Methods: Between January 2019 and December 2020, 36 patients with DRF aged > 60 years were evaluated retrospectively. There were 19 patients in the CRP group and 17 patients in the VLP group. Wrist flexion, extension, pronation, supination, ulnar deviation, and radial deviation degrees and grip strength were measured in the first year of their treatment. The patients were evaluated functionally by patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE), modified Green and O'Brien score (MGOS), and resting and stress visual analogue scale (VAS). Results: In both groups, similar ROM values were obtained and no significant difference was observed. While the PRWE score was 17.5 ± 5.5 in the CRP group and 12.5 ± 4.8 in the VLP group, the MGOS score was 83.0 ± 7.4 in the CRP group and 86.8 ± 12.6 in the VLP group, and the scores were not significantly different (p = 0.802, p = 0.315). While there was almost no pain in both groups at rest, more pain was felt in the VKP group under stress. While grip strength was 20.9 ± 6.4 kg in the CRP group, it was 22.2 ± 6.8 kg in the VLP group, and there was no significant difference compared to the contralateral wrist. Conclusion: There is no clinical and functional difference between CRP and VLP in the one-year period after DRF treatment in the patient population aged > 60 years. Treatment should be planned according to the functional capacity of the patient.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Various Treatment Options for Distal Radius Fractures

Purpose

To conduct a cost-effectiveness study of nonsurgical and surgical treatment options for distal radius fractures using distinct posttreatment outcome patterns.

Methods

We created a decision tree to model the following treatment modalities for distal radius fractures: nonsurgical management, external fixation, percutaneous pinning, and plate fixation. Each node of the model was associated with specific costs in dollars, a utility adjustment (quality-adjusted life year [QALY]), and a percent likelihood. The nodes of the decision tree included uneventful healing, eventful healing and no further intervention, carpal tunnel syndrome, trigger finger, and tendon rupture as well as associated treatments for each event. The percent probabilities of each transition state, QALY values, and costs of intervention were gleaned from a systematic review. Rollback and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analyses were conducted to identify optimal treatment strategies. Threshold values of $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY were used to distinguish the modalities in the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis.

Results

Both the rollback analysis and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis revealed nonsurgical management as the predominant strategy when compared with the other operative modalities. Nonsurgical management dominated external fixation and plate fixation, although it was comparable with percutaneous fixation, yielding a $2,242 lesser cost and 0.017 lesser effectiveness.

Conclusions

The cost effectiveness of nonsurgical management is driven by its decreased cost to the health care system. Plate and external fixation have been shown to be both more expensive and less effective than other proposed treatments. Percutaneous pinning has demonstrated more favorable effectiveness in the literature than plate and external fixation and, thus, may be more cost effective in certain circumstances. Future studies may find value in investigating further clinical aspects of distal radius fractures and their association with nonsurgical management versus that with plate fixation.

Type of study/level of evidence

Economic/decision analysis II.

Volar locking plate vs cast immobilization for distal radius fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Effectiveness of surgical versus conservative treatment of distal radius fractures in elderly patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine whether surgical treatment is more effective than conservative treatment in terms of functional outcomes in elderly patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs).

METHODS

An electronic search of the Medline, Central, Embase, PEDro, Lilacs, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases was performed, from inception until July 2021. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies were randomized clinical trials that compared surgical versus conservative treatment in subjects older than 60 years with DRFs. Two authors independently performed the search, data extraction, and assessed risk of bias (RoB) using the Cochrane RoB tool.

RESULTS

Twelve trials met the eligibility criteria, and nine studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. For volar plate versus cast immobilization at 1-year follow-up, the mean difference (MD) for PRWE was -5.36 points (p=0.02), for DASH was -4.03 points (p=0.02), for grip strength was 8.32% (p=0.0004), for wrist flexion was 4.35 degrees (p=0.10), for wrist extension was -1.52 degrees (p=0.008), for pronation was 2.7 degrees (p=0.009), for supination was 4.88 degrees (p=0.002), and for EQ-VAS was 2.73 points (p=0.0007), with differences in favor of volar plate. For K-wire versus cast immobilization at 12 months, there were no statistically significant differences in wrist range of motion (p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There was low to high evidence according to GRADE ratings, with a statistically significant difference in functional outcomes in favor of volar plate versus conservative treatment at 1-year follow-up. However, these differences are not minimally clinically important, suggesting that both types of management are equally effective in patients older than 60 years with DRFs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I; Therapeutic (Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials).

Interventions for Distal Radius Fractures: A Meta-analysis of Comparison Studies

Background  Distal radius fractures are one of the most frequent orthopaedic injuries. There are many effective treatment methods, such as volar plate, dorsal plate, percutaneous pins, external fixation, and casting; however, comparison of the treatment outcomes has not been thoroughly investigated. Our purpose is to determine if volar plating is the superior treatment method for distal radius fractures. We will address this through the following questions: First, is volar plating superior to dorsal plating, percutaneous pins, external fixation, or casting in terms of reported complications? Second, does volar plating produce superior functional outcomes to dorsal plating, percutaneous pins, external fixation, or casting? Third, are the radiographic outcomes superior for volar plating when compared with dorsal plating, percutaneous pins, external fixation, or casting? Methods  MEDLINE, Academic Search Ultimate, Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus, and JSTOR databases, as well as manual search, were used to identify papers comparing complications and functional results of volar plating to other treatment methods for distal radius fractures published after the year 2000. Complication data and function scores were recorded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and data was analyzed for meta-analysis using Cochrane ReviewManager software. Results  Compared with dorsal plate, volar plate performed significantly better in Gartland and Werley score. Volar plating outperformed percutaneous pins for loss of reduction, infection, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, and ulnar deviation. Loss of reduction, malunion, Patient Related Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score, DASH score, grip strength, ulnar deviation, and supination were significantly better for volar plating when compared with casting. When compared with external fixation, volar plating had significantly less cases of infection, lower QuickDASH score, and higher range of motion for flexion, pronation, and supination. All other complication and functional outcomes were not significantly different. Conclusions  Distal radius fractures treated with volar plating showed relatively better measures of complications, function scores, and range of motion than other treatment methods; however, there was no significant difference in healing time when compared with percutaneous pins. More studies are needed to compare the rest of the treatment methods with each other.

Surgical Plating vs Closed Reduction for Fractures in the Distal Radius in Older Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The burden of injury and costs of wrist fractures are substantial. Surgical treatment became popular without strong supporting evidence.

Objective

To assess whether current surgical treatment for displaced distal radius fractures provided better patient-reported wrist pain and function than nonsurgical treatment in patients 60 years and older.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this multicenter randomized clinical trial and parallel observational study, 300 eligible patients were screened from 19 centers in Australia and New Zealand from December 1, 2016, until December 31, 2018. A total of 166 participants were randomized to surgical or nonsurgical treatment and followed up at 3 and 12 months by blinded assessors. Those 134 individuals who declined randomization were included in a parallel observational cohort with the same treatment options and follow-up. The primary analysis was intention to treat; sensitivity analyses included as-treated and per-protocol analyses.

Intervention

Surgical treatment was open reduction and internal fixation using a volar-locking plate (VLP). Nonsurgical treatment was closed reduction and cast immobilization (CR).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score, health-related quality of life, pain, major complications, patient-reported treatment success, bother with appearance, and therapy use.

Results

In the 300 study participants (mean [SD] age, 71.2 [7.5] years; 269 [90%] female; 166 [81 VLP and 85 CR] in the randomized clinical trial sample and 134 [32 VLP and 102 CR] in the observational sample), no clinically important between-group difference in 12-month Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation scores (mean [SD] score of 19.8 [21.1] for VLP and 21.5 [24.3] for CR; mean difference, 1.7 points; 95% CI -5.4 to 8.8) was observed. No clinically important differences were found in quality of life, wrist pain, or bother at 3 and 12 months. No significant difference was found in total complications between groups (12 of 84 [14%] for the CR group vs 6 of 80 [8%] for the VLP group; risk ratio [RR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.21-1.33). Patient-reported treatment success favored the VLP group at 12 months (very successful or successful: 70 [89%] vs 57 [70%]; RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.07-1.48; P = .005). There was greater use of postoperative physical therapy in the VLP group (56 [72%] vs 44 [54%]; RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69; P = 0.02).

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found no between-group differences in improvement in wrist pain or function at 12 months from VLP fixation over CR for displaced distal radius fractures in older people.

Trial Registration

http://anzctr.org.au identifier: ACTRN12616000969460.

Comparison of outcomes between nonsurgical and surgical treatment of distal radius fracture: a systematic review update and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This study was a systematic review comparing the clinical outcomes of nonsurgical and surgical management for distal radius fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted using multiple databases, including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane. All databases were searched from the earliest records through June 2019 using the following Boolean operators: distal radius fracture, conservative treatment, nonoperative treatment, nonsurgical treatment, surgical treatment, and operative. All prospective and retrospective controlled trials were retrieved that directly compared the functional outcomes between the nonsurgical and surgical groups.

RESULTS

Five prospective studies and six retrospective comparative studies were retrieved. A total of 1049 patients were included: 529 in the nonsurgical group and 520 in the surgical group. Both types of treatment led to similar results with respect to DASH and grip strength, as well as and most other functional assessments. However, there was significant difference in radial inclination, radial length, ulnar variance and range of wrist flexion.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in most functional assessments were found when comparing surgical and nonsurgical management of distal radius fractures. Although there were significant differences in radial inclination, radial deviation, ulnar variance, and wrist flexion, they did not seem to have impacts on the quality of wrist. Nonsurgical treatment for the distal radius fractures should be considered firstly. Indications for operative fixation should be considered carefully in the treatment of DRFs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study (systematic review), Level III.

Volar Locked Plating Versus Closed Reduction and Casting for Acute, Displaced Distal Radial Fractures in the Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether volar locked plating (VLP) yields a better functional outcome than closed reduction and casting (CRC) for elderly patients with an acute, displaced distal radial fracture. Our purpose was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes of VLP and CRC for elderly patients (age, ≥60 years).

METHODS

Multiple databases, including MEDLINE, were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating outcomes following distal radial fracture treatment. Raw data were obtained for studies that included patients of all ages, and the elderly subgroup was included for analysis. The primary outcome was the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at ≥1 year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the 3-month DASH score, range of motion, final radiographic alignment, and complications. Effect sizes for the comparison of each outcome between groups were pooled across studies using random-effects models with the inverse variance weighting method. Changes in DASH score were compared with a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) estimate of 10 to assess clinical relevance.

RESULTS

Of 2,152 screened articles, 6 were included. Demographics were similar for the 274 VLP and 287 CRC patients. DASH scores were significantly better following VLP than CRC at the time of final follow-up (12 to 24 months postoperatively; score difference, -5.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.7 to -3.1) and at 3 months (-8.9; 95% CI, -13.0 to -4.8). VLP yielded significantly better palmar tilt, radial inclination, and supination, with no differences in ulnar variance, flexion-extension, pronation, or total complication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional outcome was significantly better following VLP than CRC 3 months into the treatment of acute, displaced distal radial fractures in an elderly population and up to 2 years after injury. However, the observed differences in the final DASH score did not exceed published estimates of the MCID, suggesting that clinical outcomes are similar for both treatment options.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A Combined Randomised and Observational Study of Surgery for Fractures In the distal Radius in the Elderly (CROSSFIRE): a statistical analyses plan

Background

We are performing a combined randomised and observational study comparing internal fixation to non-surgical management for common wrist fractures in older patients. This paper describes the statistical analysis plan.

Methods/design

A Combined Randomised and Observational Study of Surgery for Fractures In the distal Radius in the Elderly (CROSSFIRE) is a randomised controlled trial comparing two types of usual care for treating wrist fractures in older patients, surgical fixation using volar locking plates and non-surgical treatment using closed reduction and plaster immobilisation. The primary aim of this comparative-effectiveness study is to determine whether surgery is superior to non-surgical treatment with respect to patient-reported wrist function at 12 months post treatment. The secondary outcomes include radiographic outcomes, complication rates and patient-reported outcomes including quality of life, pain, treatment success and cosmesis. Primary analysis will use a two-sample t test and an intention-to-treat analysis using the randomised arm of the study. Statistical analyses will be two-tailed and significance will be determined by p < 0.05. Sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess for differences in intention-to-treat, per-protocol and as-treated analyses. Sensitivity analyses will also be conducted to assess selection bias by evaluating differences in participants between the randomised and observational study arms, and for bias relating to any missing data. An economic analysis will be conducted separately if surgery is shown to provide superior outcomes to a level of clinical significance.

Discussion

This statistical analysis plan describes the analysis of the CROSSFIRE study which aims to provide evidence to aid clinical decision-making in the treatment of distal radius fractures in older patients.

Trial registration

CROSSFIRE was approved by The Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (HNEHREC Reference No: 16/02/17/3.04). Registered on 22 July 2016 with The Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR Number; ACTRN12616000969460).

This manuscript is based on v.11 of the statistical analysis plan. A copy of v.11, signed by the chief investigator and the senior statistician is kept at the administering institution.

Nonoperative treatment versus volar locking plate fixation for elderly patients with distal radial fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the role of nonoperative treatment and volar locking plate (VLP) fixation in elderly patients with distal radial fracture.

Methods

The systematic literature review identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies using VLP and nonoperative treatment for distal radial fractures in the elderly. Two investigators independently extracted data and evaluated the quality of the studies. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan version 5.3.

Results

The five RCTs and six observational studies included 585 and 604 patients in the VLP and nonoperation groups, respectively. The quality of these 11 studies was moderate. Compared to nonoperation treatment, VLP did not improve the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], −3.58–−0.24; P = 0.09), decrease complications (odds ratio = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.51–2.19; P = 0.89), or improve range of motion in flexion, extension, pronation, supination, and radial deviation. The VLP group had better grip strength (WMD = 10.52; 95% CI, 6.19–14.86; P < 0.0001) and radiographic assessment than the nonoperation group.

Conclusions

Although insufficient, the study evidence shows that VLP does not improve DASH scores, complications, or range of motion, but it might provide better grip strength and radiographic assessment than nonoperation treatment.

Relationship Between Hand Dominance and Treatment Outcomes for Distal Radius Fractures in the Elderly in the Short-Term

Purpose

Many studies have found no notable long-term differences in functional outcomes between operative and conservative treatments for distal radius fractures (DRFs) in elderly patients. However, those studies have not considered hand dominance. The current study compared outcomes between both treatments in a dominant wrist–injured group (dominant group) and nondominant wrist–injured group (nondominant group).

Methods

A total of 101 patients aged 65 years and older who experienced displaced DRF requiring reduction and who were managed for over 3 months with either operative or conservative treatment were examined. The dominant group included 46 subjects (operative, n = 26; conservative, n = 20), and the nondominant group included 55 subjects (operative, n = 28; conservative, n = 27). All operative treatments were performed with volar locking plate fixation, and all conservative treatments were immobilized with a sugar-tong orthosis or forearm cast. Functional outcomes and radiographic assessments were compared 3 months after treatment. The primary outcome measure was the Quick–Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) score; secondary outcomes were grip strength, range of motion, and Mayo wrist score. We also examined QuickDASH scores after at least 1 year.

Results

The QuickDASH score showed no significant differences between treatments by dominance at 3 months or more than a year. In the dominant group, operative treatment resulted in significant 7-kg greater grip strength at 3 months, whereas the nondominant group showed no significant differences in functional outcomes between treatments.

Conclusions

Although QuickDASH scores were similar at 3 months and 1 year between treatments regardless of hand dominance, surgery for dominant-side DRF resulted in better grip strength than conservative treatment at 3 months.

Clinical relevance

This study will help clarify potential outcomes differences between operative and conservative DRF treatment in patients aged over age 65 years.

Two casting methods compared in patients with Colles' fracture: A pragmatic, randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Distal radius fractures are common fractures and the cornerstone of treatment remains immobilization of the wrist in a cast. At present, there is a scarcity of studies that compare different cast immobilization methods. The objective of the study was therefore to compare volar-flexion and ulnar deviation cast to functional cast position in the treatment of dorsally displaced distal radius fracture among elderly patients.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We performed a pragmatic, randomized, controlled trial in three emergency centers in Finland. After closed reduction of the fracture, the wrist was placed in either volar-flexion and ulnar deviation cast or functional cast position. The follow-up was 12 months. The primary outcome was patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE) score at 12 months. The secondary outcomes were Quick-DASH score, grip strength, health-related quality of life (15D), and pain catastrophizing scale. The number of complications was also recorded. In total, 105 participants were included in the study. Of these, 88% were female and the mean age was 73.5 (range 65-94) years. In the primary analysis, the mean difference in patient-rated wrist evaluation measure between groups was -4.9 (95% CI: -13.1.- 3.4., p = .24) in favor of the functional cast position. Operative treatment due to loss of reduction of fracture was performed for four patients (8%) in the FC group and for seven patients (13%) in the volar-flexion and ulnar deviation cast group (OR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.16-2.1).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the data were consistent with a wide range of treatment effects when comparing two different cast positions in the treatment of distal radius fracture among elderly patients at 12-month follow-up. However, the functional cast is more likely to be superior when compared to volar-flexion and ulnar deviation cast.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02894983 Accessible: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02894983.

Operative vs Nonoperative Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

No consensus has been reached to date regarding the optimal treatment for distal radius fractures. The international rate of operative treatment has been increasing, despite higher costs and limited functional outcome evidence to support this shift.

OBJECTIVES

To compare functional, clinical, and radiologic outcomes after operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures in adults.

DATA SOURCES

The PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases were searched from inception to June 15, 2019, for studies comparing operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting on the following: acute distal radius fracture with operative treatment (internal or external fixation) vs nonoperative treatment (cast immobilization, splinting, or bracing); patients 18 years or older; and functional outcome. Studies in a language other than English or reporting treatment for refracture were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effects models and presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed in September 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome measures included medium-term functional outcome measured with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) and the overall complication rate after operative and nonoperative treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 23 unique studies were included, consisting of 8 RCTs and 15 observational studies, that described 2254 unique patients. Among the studies that presented sex data, 1769 patients were women [80.6%]. Overall weighted mean age was 67 [range, 22-90] years). The RCTs included 656 patients (29.1%); observational studies, 1598 patients (70.9%). The overall pooled effect estimates the showed a significant improvement in medium-term (≤1 year) DASH score after operative treatment compared with nonoperative treatment (MD, -5.22 [95% CI, -8.87 to -1.57]; P = .005; I2 = 84%). No difference in complication rate was observed (RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69-1.55]; P = .87; I2 = 62%). A significant improvement in grip strength was noted after operative treatment, measured in kilograms (MD, 2.73 [95% CI, 0.15-5.32]; P = .04; I2 = 79%) and as a percentage of the unaffected side (MD, 8.21 [95% CI, 2.26-14.15]; P = .007; I2 = 76%). No improvement in medium-term DASH score was found in the subgroup of studies that only included patients 60 years or older (MD, -0.98 [95% CI, -3.52 to 1.57]; P = .45; I2 = 34%]), compared with a larger improvement in medium-term DASH score after operative treatment in the other studies that included patients 18 years or older (MD, -7.50 [95% CI, -12.40 to -2.60]; P = .003; I2 = 77%); the difference between these subgroups was statically significant (test for subgroup differences, P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This meta-analysis suggests that operative treatment of distal radius fractures improves the medium-term DASH score and grip strength compared with nonoperative treatment in adults, with no difference in overall complication rate. The findings suggest that operative treatment might be more effective and have a greater effect on the health and well-being of younger, nonelderly patients.

Epidemiology of Distal Radius Fixations and Functional Outcomes in the Superelderly Population

Background: Superelderly patients (defined as 80 years old and older) account for 18% of all distal radius fractures in our institution and this number is increasing with the ageing population. When faced with the option of surgery, patients in this age group have concerns with regards to the long term outcomes including functional outcomes and the time to fracture union. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the functional outcomes in this specific population. Methods: Patient selection for surgery was determined by the fracture stability, the patient's premorbid function and underlying comorbidities. Post operatively, the time to fracture union after surgical fixation, surgical complications and patients' functional outcome scores were recorded. The method of anaesthesia and any anaesthesia-related complications were also included. Results: There were 76 superelderly patients who underwent surgical fixation of their distal radius fractures identified from our institution's prospective database from 2009 to 2016. Overall there were good functional outcome scores. The DASH scores at 3 months and 6 months were 17 and 10 respectively. Furthermore, the mean time to fracture union in our population was 47 days (approximately 7 weeks). There were only 2 post-operative surgical complications but no anaesthesia-related complications. Conclusions: Surgical fixation of distal radius fractures in appropriately selected patients in the superelderly population yields good functional outcomes.

Management of Unstable Distal Radius Fractures: A Survey of Hand Surgeons

Background  Length of immobilization after operative fixation of unstable distal radius fractures and management in elderly patients is an area of debate. Purpose  The purpose of this study is to delineate common practices of fellowship-trained hand surgeons and how they compare with current evidence-based protocols. Methods  Surveys were distributed to American Society for Surgery of the Hand members on preferred methods of fixation, postoperative immobilization, and variations in treatment of elderly patients with unstable distal radius fractures. Responses were analyzed in comparison to a literature review. Subgroups were compared with regard to training, practice type, and years in practice. Results  Four-hundred eighty-five surveys were analyzed. Volar fixed-angle plating was the most common choice of fixation (84.7%). Patients are most often immobilized for 1 to 2 weeks (40.0%) with range of motion (ROM) therapy begun most commonly between 1 and 4 weeks (47.2%). The majority of surgeons do not treat fractures differently in patients more than 65 years old. Physicians with more than 20 years of experience were significantly more likely to begin wrist ROM sooner with volar plating versus other fixation techniques compared with physicians with less than 20 years of experience (40.7% vs. 34.2%, respectively). Also, physicians in academic-only practices were more likely to immobilize patients for a shorter time after volar plating compared with those in privademics. Conclusion  Volar fixed-angle plating is the dominant fixation method for unstable distal radius fractures among fellowship-trained hand surgeons. Elderly patients are not treated more conservatively and rigid immobilization after operative fixation remains the treatment of choice despite current evidence-based protocols.

Treatment Trends, Complications, and Effects of Comorbidities on Distal Radius Fractures

Background: Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are the most common upper extremity fractures in adults. This study seeks to elucidate the impact age, fracture type, and patient comorbidities have on the current treatment of DRFs and risk of complications. We hypothesized that comorbidities rather than age would relate to the risk of complications in the treatment of DRFs. Methods: A retrospective review of data was performed for patients treated between 2007 and 2014 using Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. Patients who sustained a DRF were separated into "closed" versus "open" treatment groups, and the association between patient demographics, treatment type, and comorbidities with complication rates was analyzed, along with the trend of treatment modalities throughout the study time interval. Results: In total, 155 353 DRFs were identified; closed treatment predominated in all age groups with the highest percentage of open treatment occurring in the 50- to 59-year age group. Between 2007 and 2014, there was an increase in the rate of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in all age groups <90 with the largest increase (11%) occurring in the 70- to 79-year age group. Higher complication rates were observed in the open treatment group in all ages <90 years with a trend toward decreasing complication rates as age increased. Comorbidities were more strongly associated with the risk of developing complications than age. Conclusions: Closed treatment of DRFs remains the predominant treatment method among all age groups, but DRFs are increasingly being treated with ORIF. Emphasis on the patients' comorbidities rather than chronological age should be considered in the treatment decision-making process of elderly patients with DRFs.

Cast immobilization versus volar locking plate fixation of AO type C distal radial fractures in patients aged 60 years and older

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of conservative treatment (cast immobilization) for complex intra-articular distal radius fractures (AO type C) in elderly patients and to determine whether or not the application of a volar locking plate (VLP) is necessary.

Methods

A retrospective study on patients treated at two different clinics was conducted between 2014 and 2016. A total of 49 elderly patients ≥60 years old were treated either operatively with volar locking plate fixation (n = 25; 7 males and 18 females; mean age: 66.6 ± 7.4 years) or conservatively with cast immobilisation (n = 24; 7 males and 17 females; mean age: 68.9 ± 8.7 years) for complex intra-articular distal fractures. Clinical, functional and radiological evaluations were conducted at the final follow-up examinations of the patients.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups of patients with respect to the follow-up periods, gender, age and fracture type (p > 0.05). At the end of mean follow-up time of 16 months the grip strength (p = 0.03), radial tilt (p = 0.06), radial inclination (p = 0.01), radial height (p = 0.01) and articular step-off (p = 0.02) were significantly better in the volar locking plate group, while there was no significant difference between the functional results (based on the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score) (p = 0.8) and range of motion. The grip strength was significantly higher in the VLP group when compared to the cast group (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

The results of this study suggest that the locking plate fixation for the complex intra-articular distal radius fractures provides better results for the grip strength and radiographic parameters than cast immobilization in patients ≥60 years old, while no difference was found between the clinical and functional results.

Level of Evidence

Level III, Therapeutic Study.

Volar Locking Plate Fixation of Distal Radius Fractures: Splint versus Immediate Mobilization

Background  The goal of this study was to demonstrate that the use of a splint after performing an osteosynthesis of the distal radius with a volar locking plate is unnecessary. The main hypothesis was that postoperative flexion of the wrist was greater without a splint. Secondary hypothesis was that patients who were allowed immediate mobilization got better results in terms of pain, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), strength, extension, pronation, and supination. Case Description  Our series included 72 patients, aged 59 years in average of which 59 were female patients. All patients had been operated for a volar locking plate fixation of a distal radius fracture. The first 36 patients (group I) were immobilized by a splint at 30° of extension of the wrist for 2 weeks. The following 36 patients (group II) were not immobilized. Results  At 3 months, all the average variables were better in the group without splint (group I: flexion 74.83%, extension 83.13%, pronation 92.07%, supination 88.11%, pain 1.72/10, Quick DASH 21.78/100, PRWE 22.97/100, strength 62.96%; group II: flexion 85.50%, extension 83.4%, pronation 92.96%, supination 92.96%, pain 1.28/10, Quick DASH 19.57/100, PRWE 20.56/100, strength 66.34%). No complication was reported. Conclusion  Overall, our results demonstrate that wearing a splint after volar locking plate fixation of a distal radius fracture is unnecessary.

Cost minimization analysis of the treatment of distal radial fractures in the elderly

AIMS

The aim of this study was to test the null hypothesis that there is no difference, from the payer perspective, in the cost of treatment of a distal radial fracture in an elderly patient, aged > 65 years, between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and closed reduction (CR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data relating to the treatment of these injuries in the elderly between January 2007 and December 2015 were extracted using the Humana and Medicare Advantage Databases. The primary outcome of interest was the cost associated with treatment. Secondary analysis included the cost of common complications. Statistical analysis was performed using a non-parametric t-test and chi-squared test.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 8924 patients treated with ORIF and 5629 patients treated with CR. The mean cost of an uncomplicated ORIF was more than a CR ($7749 versus $2161). The mean additional cost of a complication in the ORIF group was greater than in the CR group ($1853 versus $1362).

CONCLUSION

These findings show that there are greater payer fees associated with ORIF than CR in patients aged > 65 years with a distal radial fracture. CR may be a higher-value intervention in these patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:205-11.

Conservative treatment of distal fractures after the age of 65: a review of literature

The goal of this study was to evaluate the role of conservative treatment of distal radius fractures in the elderly since 2000. Our series included 22 articles, of which 3 reviews, 2 meta-analyses, 6 descriptive series of conservative treatment, 10 series comparing surgical and conservative treatments and 1 series comparing different types of conservative treatments. The reduction was performed by closed reduction in 7 cases and by traction in 3 cases. A short-arm cast was used in 8 cases and a long-arm cast in 4 cases for an average length of 6 weeks. The indications of conservative treatment were varied: AO type A fractures in 2 cases, type C fractures in 1 case, types A and C in 8 cases and types A, B and C in 3 cases. No article reported any significant difference between surgical and conservative treatments in terms of DASH or PRWE, whereas strength was sometimes improved when surgical treatment was used. Radiological results were always better after surgical treatment. The rate of complications varied greatly, greater, equally or lower compared to conservative treatment depending on the series. All in all, there is no consensus to assert that a conservative treatment is more justified than a surgical treatment to treat distal radius fractures after the age of 65. Most authors consider that the long-term clinical outcome is identical and that the radiological result is better after surgical treatment. The fact that the fixation of a distal radius fracture by a volar locking plate after 65 years speeds up the recovery remains to be proven.

The role of brachioradialis release during AO type C distal radius fracture fixation

INTRODUCTION

Open reduction and internal fixation of distal radius fractures often necessitates release of the brachioradialis from the radial styloid. However, whether this common procedure makes the reduction and fixation easier and affects the elbow function has not been fully understood.

HYPOTHESIS

Brachioradialis (BR) release during volar plate fixation for type C distal radius fractures makes internal reduction and fixation easier, and it does not adversely affect wrist or elbow function.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 74 patients treated with 2.4mm volar locking compression column plate (VCP) were analyzed for type C distal radius fractures prospectively. The patients were divided into two groups, group A with BR release and group B without BR release. The two groups were compared in terms of "internal reduction and fixation time" during the operation, wrist and elbow function including the scores of Gartland and Werley (G-W), Patient-related wrist evaluation score (PRWE), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the Disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and a Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The radial inclination angle, palmar tilt angle and ulnar variance were also measured from the radiographs.

RESULTS

According to the follow-up of the 74 patients, no significant differences were observed between the two groups on MEPS, DASH, G-W, PRWE, VAS and radiological outcomes at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Mean time of reduction and internal fixation was significantly shorter in group A than that in group B.

CONCLUSION

Release of the BR for type C distal radius fractures facilitated the surgical procedure and did not adversely affect elbow and wrist function.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, prospective comparative study.

Volar Plate Fixation in Patients Older Than 70 Years with AO Type C Distal Radial Fractures: Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes

Introduction  Treatment of unstable distal radial fractures (DRFs) in elderly patients is controversial, and considering the increasing life expectancy, their appropriate treatment is of growing importance. Our aim was to analyze the clinical and radiologic outcomes in the elderly patients with AO type C DRF treated with volar locking plate (VLP). Materials and Methods  Between 2007 and 2011, 572 DRFs were operated on in our hospital with open reduction and internal fixation with VLP. Of these, only 64 patients (66 DRFs) met the selection criteria (AO type C DRF, age > 70 years, minimum 12-month follow-up). Mean follow-up was 28 months. Outcome assessment included range of motion, grip strength, VAS pain, Mayo Clinic Score, and DASH score. Analysis of pre- and postoperative radiographs was performed. Complications were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed comparing the results with the contralateral side. Results  Mean postoperative range of motion of the injured wrist compared with the control contralateral side was 86% for flexion ( p  < 0.001), 92% for extension ( p  < 0.001). The average DASH was 12. Mayo Clinic Wrist Score showed 43 excellent results, 15 good, 4 satisfactory, and 4 poor. Articular step-offs were reduced in 34 of 38 wrists. Five (7%) patients required plate removal. Conclusion  The treatment of articular DRF (AO type C) with VLP in the elderly patients achieved greater than 90% of the wrist range of motion and grip strength with no residual pain in greater than 90% of the patients. Level of Evidence  Therapeutic IV, case series.

[Clinical results following conservative and surgical treatment of osteoporotic distal radius fractures in the elderly : Overview of best available evidence]

Fractures of the distal radius in elderly patients increasingly contribute to the workload in emergency departments worldwide. There is still no consensus about the best treatment option, e. g. closed reduction and cast stabilization, percutaneous pinning, external fixation or open reduction and internal fixation with volar locking plates (ORIF). In addition, the influence of pharmacological antiosteoporotic treatment (e. g. bisphosphonates) is unclear. In this overview five comparative studies were analyzed, which had been identified in a previous systematic review. The evaluation included 3 cohort studies and 2 randomized trials enrolling a total of 515 patients. A clinical or statistical advantage of ORIF over conservative treatment with respect to DASH scores 12 months after the index fracture event could not be demonstrated with a mean difference of 0.25 (95 % confidence interval CI -0.57-1.07). According to current best scientific evidence from preclinical and clinical investigations, antiosteoporotic medication does not have an unfavorable influence on fracture healing and should be continued due to its proven effectiveness in reducing subsequent osteoporotic fractures. Following distal radius fractures in elderly patients with clinical risk factors, an osteoporosis screening should be routine practice and a specific therapy should be initiated if the fracture risk is increased.

Intramedullary Nail Fixation for Displaced and Unstable Distal Radial Fractures in Patients Aged 65 Years or Older

BACKGROUND

Distal radius fractures in elderly patients are now commonly treated with a volar locking plate, but flexor pollicis longus dysfunction caused by stripping of the muscle and tendon irritation and rupture caused by prominence of the implant have been reported. Intramedullary implants can stabilize distal radius fractures while minimally affecting the flexor and extensor tendons and muscles around the site, but osteoporosis in elderly patients might affect the radiographic and functional results of distal radius fractures treated by intramedullary implants. We investigated the radiographic and functional results of intramedullary implants for distal radius fractures in patients ≥65 years of age.

METHODS

We reviewed medical records of 40 patients with extra-articular or simple intra-articular fractures with the sagittal fracture line treated by an intramedullary implant.

RESULTS

All fractures achieved bony union, with an average radial inclination of 24.9 degrees, volar tilt of 9.2 degrees, and ulnar variance of 0.7 mm. We encountered one case of postoperative volar displacement of the distal fragment due to the small size of the intramedullary implant. The average range of motion was 69.8 and 59.9 degrees for dorsal and palmar wrist flexion, respectively. Average percentile grip strength of the uninjured side was 97%. The average Mayo modified wrist score at final follow-up was 91.9 points, with 20 patients graded as excellent, 16 as good, and 4 as fair.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study indicate that intramedullary implants for dorsally displaced extra-articular or simple intraarticular distal radius fractures may offer good radiological and functional outcomes without hardware irritation in elderly patients. Distal radius fractures with an osteoporotic, large medullary canal should be stabilized by implants of an appropriate size.

Safety and Efficacy of Operative Versus Nonsurgical Management of Distal Radius Fractures in Elderly Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and efficacy of operative versus nonsurgical treatment of distal radius fractures in elderly patients.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that satisfied predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Outcomes of interest included pain level, grip strength, wrist range of motion, wrist functional assessment, radiographic parameters, and complications; we compared these using continuous measurements. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess operative versus nonsurgical procedures in patients aged 60 years and older.

RESULTS

Two randomized controlled trials and 6 retrospective studies were included. Meta-analysis did not detect statistically significant differences in pooled data for pain level, functional assessment, and wrist range of motion between the operative and nonsurgical groups. Grip strength was significantly greater in the operative group. The incidence of major complications requiring surgery and that of tendon injury were significantly higher in the operative group. Radiographic outcomes including volar tilt, radial inclination, and ulnar variance were significantly better in the operative group. Considerable heterogeneity was present in all studies and adversely affected the precision of the meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature does not support the theory that operative management can provide better clinical outcomes for elderly patients with distal radius fractures. Although operative management can offer better radiographic outcomes and grip strength than can nonsurgical treatment, the risk of complications requiring surgical treatment is greater. Thus, indications for operative fixation should be considered carefully in the treatment of elderly patients.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic III.

Management of Severely Comminuted Distal Radius Fractures

Distal radius fractures are among the most common fractures of the upper extremity. Indications for operative and nonsurgical management have evolved over time, as have fixation techniques. Volar locking plates are commonly used in the treatment of selected distal radius fractures such as low-energy or relatively uncomplicated fractures. They have limitations, however, in the management of highly comminuted fracture patterns and in polytrauma patients. In these patients, other methods ranging from spanning fixation to fragment-specific fixation have emerged as useful alternatives in the surgeon's armamentarium for treatment of these challenging fractures.

Comparison of treatment outcomes between nonsurgical and surgical treatment of distal radius fracture in elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The best treatment of distal radius fractures (DRFs) in the elderly is uncertain. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of DRFs in persons 65 years of age or older.

METHODS

Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases were searched until April 27, 2015 using the following search terms: distal radius fracture, conservative treatment, nonoperative treatment, nonsurgical treatment, surgical treatment, operative, elderly, and older. The primary outcome measure was DASH score, and secondary outcomes were functional and radiological assessments. The standard difference in post-treatment means was calculated for the outcomes to compare the two groups.

RESULTS

Of 59 articles identified, eight studies with a total of 440 patients in the surgical groups and 449 in the control groups were included in the analysis. No significant differences in DASH score, VAS pain score, grip strength, wrist extension, pronation, or supination, and ulnar deviation were noted between the groups. The nonsurgical group had significantly greater wrist flexion, radial deviation, and ulnar variance and less radial inclination than the surgical group.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical and nonsurgical methods produce similar results in the treatment of DRFS in the elderly, and minor objective functional differences did not result an impact on subjective function outcome and quality of life.