Comparison between Surgical and Conservative Treatment for Distal Radius Fractures in Patients over 65 Years

Cast immobilization duration for distal radius fractures, a systematic review

PURPOSE

The optimal duration of immobilization for the conservative treatment of non- or minimally displaced and displaced distal radius fractures remains under debate. This research aims to review studies of these treatments to add evidence regarding the optimal immobilization period.

METHODS

A comprehensive database search was conducted. Studies investigating and comparing short (< 3 weeks) versus long (> 3 weeks) immobilizations for the conservative treatment of distal radius fractures were included. The studies were evaluated for radiological and functional outcomes, including pain, grip strength, and range of motion. Two reviewers independently reviewed all studies and performed the data extraction.

RESULTS

The initial database search identified 11.981 studies, of which 16 (involving 1.118 patients) were ultimately included. Patient-reported outcome measurements, grip strength, range of motion, and radiological outcomes were often better after shorter immobilization treatments. Radiological outcomes were better with longer immobilization in two studies and shorter immobilization in one study. Fourteen studies concluded that early mobilization is preferred, while the remaining two studies observed better outcomes with longer immobilization. The data were unsuitable for meta-analysis due to their heterogeneous nature.

CONCLUSION

Shorter immobilization for conservatively treated distal radius fractures often yield equal or better outcomes than longer immobilizations. The immobilization for non- or minimally displaced distal radius fractures could therefore be shortened to 3 weeks or less. Displaced and reduced distal radius fractures cannot be immobilized shorter than 4 weeks due to the risk of complications. Future research with homogeneous groups could elucidate the optimal duration of immobilization.

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.

Is the Postoperative Outcome after Intraarticular Distal Radius Fracture Influenced by Age and Gender? A PROM Study

BACKGROUND

Although the most common fracture of the human body, so far, only few data concerning gender-specific outcomes after distal radius fracture exist. Typically, elderly women suffer from DRF due to a low-energy fall because of osteoporosis. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome after a surgically treated intraarticular DRF with the help of patient-reported outcome measurement (PROM) and with special regard to gender and age impact.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

It is a retrospective case-control study in which all patients with an intraarticular DRF were enrolled. The control group was composed of healthy volunteers. Munich Wrist Questionnaire (MWQ) was used as Patient Related Outcome Measurement (PROM) for analyzing the outcome. Moreover, age, gender, handedness, fracture classification and follow-up interval were detected. The functional outcome of the fracture group was compared to a healthy control group. Analyses of gender, age and handedness-specific results compared to the healthy control groups were performed as well.

RESULTS

197 patients with distal radius fracture could be enrolled in the study (134 were female and 63 were male). Women (mean age 62 years) were significantly older than men (mean age 50 years). The control group comprised 110 healthy subjects, 71 females (mean age 56 years) and 39 males (mean age 53 years). The whole fracture group had significantly lower MWQ scores compared to the control group (p < 0.001). The male fracture group (90.6 ± 12.4) and the female fracture group (90.8 ± 11.4) had a significantly worse outcome compared to the corresponding control group (p < 0.001 male and p = 0.034 female). Although significantly younger, the male patients had a similar outcome compared to the female patients.

DISCUSSION

Even elderly patients can reach the preoperative level after operative treatment of an intraarticular distal radius fracture. Although significantly younger than the female patients, men have significantly worse functional outcomes compared to their control and cannot perform better than the significantly older female patients. Gender might influence the outcome as well; however, age seems to have a greater impact on the outcome than gender.

Assessment of Patients' Quality of Life during Conservative Treatment after Distal Radius Fracture

Introduction: This study aimed to assess patients' quality of life after distal radius fracture treatment (at least six months, but no more than ten years, after the treatment) based on the analysis of objective and subjective parameters and the influence of the fractured side on the final results. Materials and Methods: The study sample consisted of 30 women who claimed to be right-handed, divided depending on the side of the fracture (left vs. right limb). Patients were evaluated with a goniometer for active wrist movement, pronation, and supination in the elbow joint. Furthermore, the global grip strength of the upper limb was assessed using a dynamometer (Biometrics Ltd.) device, after which patients were asked to complete a wrist evaluation questionnaire (PRWE) and the Polish version of the SF-36 questionnaire assessing the quality of life. Results: There were statistically significant differences in the active movement of the wrist of the injured limb compared to the non-injured limb. In addition, inferior results were reported for injury of the right limb to those of the left. Conclusions: Injury of the right limb as opposed to injury of the left limb can have a negative impact on the assessment of quality of life in patients with right-limb dominance.

Comparing the Outcomes of Surgical and Non-Surgical Approaches in Management of Older Patients with Distal Radius Fracture; a Retrospective Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are the most common orthopedic injuries in emergency department. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of conservative and surgical managements of DRFs in the aged population.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, ninety patients with unilateral DRFs were treated using either surgical or conservative (casting) approach and the management outcomes as well as complications were compared between the two groups at 3 and 6-month follow-ups.

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients over 70 years old were included (45 treated with cast immobilization, and 45 using the surgical method). The mean age (p = 0.56) and gender (p = 0.85) was similar in the two groups. Except for quality of life in both follow-up times, patients treated with surgical methods showed better outcomes in other aspects, including 3-month (p = 0.042) and 6-month (p = 0.022) mean Disability of the Arm Shoulder Hand (DASH) score, 3-month (p = 0.013) and 6-month (p = 0.006) mean range of motion (ROM), and 3-month (p = 0.003) and 6-month (p = 0.033) pain intensity based on Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). A total of 70 (77.77%) adverse events were registered (33 (36.6%) in the casting group and 37 (41.1%) in the surgical group; p = 0.05). The rate of mal-union (p = 0.021) and superficial radial nerve injury (p = 0.026) were significantly lower in the surgical group.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that surgical approach for management of DRFs in elder cases has better clinical and functional outcomes than cast immobilization.

Is Obesity a Risk Factor for Loss of Reduction in Children with Distal Radius Fractures Treated Conservatively?

Background: Obesity in children is a clinical and social burden. The distal radius (DR) is the most common site of fractures in childhood and conservative treatment is widely used. Loss of reduction (LOR) is the major casting complication. The aim of this study is to evaluate obesity as a risk factor for LOR in children with displaced DR fractures (DRF) treated conservatively. Methods: 189 children under 16 years of age were treated conservatively for DRF. Patients were divided into three groups: normal weight (NW), overweight (OW) and obese (OB). The following radiographic criteria were evaluated in all patients: amount of initial translation (IT); quality of initial reduction; Cast (CI), Padding (PI), Canterbury (CaI), Gap (GI) and Three-Points (3PI) indices and the presence of LOR. Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the NW and the OB group for number of LOR (p = 0.002), severity (grade) of initial translation (p = 0.008), quality of initial reduction (p = 0.01) as well as CsI and CaI (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Obese children have a significantly higher rate of LOR compared to NW and OW children. A close follow-up is necessary in this population of patients. Preventive percutaneous pinning could be considered in older obese patients in order to reduce the need for further treatment.

Quality of life after distal radius fractures

Introduction: Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are among the most commonly seen types of fractures worldwide. Numerous studies suggested that surgical treatment of DRFs results in better quality of life. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess long-term quality of life after operative and nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures among adults. Material and methods: We retrospectively studied 207 patients with isolated DRF (mean age 64 ±17.9 years, women comprised 150 (72.5%), men 57 (27.5%). There were no significant differences in sex, age, hand dominancy, energy of trauma, AO type fracture and comorbidities between patients treated operatively (n=101) and nonoperatively (n=106). After 3.9 ±1.6 years (mean ±SD) quality of life assessment was conducted using Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and International Osteoporosis Foundation Quality of Life Questionnaire (IOF QLQ). Functional outcomes were evaluated using Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) questionnaires. Results: Quality of life in operatively treated distal radius fracture patients was better than amongst those treated nonsurgically. However, after subdivision of cohorts we observed no such differences regardless of treatment method in patients aged ≥ 50 years. SF-36 and IOF QLQ scores were correlated with DASH and PRWE results. Conclusions: Quality of life questionnaires are useful tools for determining outcomes after distal radius fractures. Operative treatment may not always be superior to nonoperative management especially in patients aged 50 years or above with distal radius fractures.

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.

The Outcome of Distal Radius Fractures with Concomitant Injuries Is Similar to those of Isolated Distal Radius Fractures Provided that an Arthroscopically Supported Treatment Is Performed

BACKGROUND

Concomitant injuries of distal radius fractures (DRF) can have a fatal impact on the patients' outcome. However, wrist arthroscopy is a costly and complex procedure. It remains elusive whether patients benefit from an additional arthroscopy.

METHODS

Patients with a DRF who were treated arthroscopically were enrolled. Fifty-six wrists were evaluated regarding their function by self-assessment with the Munich Wrist Questionnaire (MWQ). Thirty-nine patients were examined for postoperative strength and motion. Concomitant injuries were detected.

RESULTS

A total of 75% of the DRF were type C injuries (AO classification). Twenty-four cases (43%) were triangular fibrocartilaginous complex (TFCC) lesion, eight cases (14%) of scapholunate ligament (SL) injuries and seven cases (12%) were a combination of TFCC and SL ligament lesion. No difference in function could be detected between DRF with surgically addressed concomitant lesions and isolated DRF. Dorsalextension, palmarflexion and grip strength were significantly reduced in patients with DRF and concomitant injuries compared to the healthy wrist. However, patients with DRF and arthroscopically treated concomitant injuries had similar results to those suffering only from an isolated DRF.

CONCLUSION

The increased occurrence of concomitant injuries is to be expected in intraarticular DRF. Patients with concomitant injuries benefit from an arthroscopically assisted fracture treatment and show similar results compared to isolated DRF.