Classification and treatment of distal radius fractures: a survey among orthopaedic trauma surgeons and residents

Purpose: Classification, the definition of an acceptable reduction and indications for surgery in distal radius fracturemanagement are still subject of debate. The purpose of this study was to characterise current distal radius fracture management in Europe. Methods: During the European Congress of Trauma and Emergency Surgery (ECTES) 2015 a 20-question multiple-choice survey was conducted among the attending surgeons and residents of the hand and wrist session. Consensus was defined as more than 50 % identical answers (moderate consensus 50–75 % and high consensus more than 75 %). Results: A total of 46 surgeons and residents participated in the survey. High consensus was found among both surgeons and residents for defining the AO/OTA classification as the preferred classification system. For the definition of an acceptable reduction, a moderate to high consensus could be determined. Overall, high consensus was found for non-operative treatment instead of operative treatment in dislocated extra- and intra-articular distal radius fractures with an acceptable closed reduction, regardless of age. We found high (surgeons) and moderate (residents) consensus on the statement that an intra-articular gap or step-off ≥2 mm, in patients younger than 65 years, is an absolute indication for ORIF. The same applied for ORIF in dislocated fractures without an acceptable closed reduction in patients younger than 75 years of age. Conclusion: Current distal radius fracture management in Europe is characterised by a moderate to high consensus on the majority of aspects of fracture management

Repair of the pronator quadratus after volar plate fixation in distal radius fractures: a systematic review

To position the volar plate on the distal radius fracture site, the pronator quadratus muscle needs to be detached from its distal and radial side and lifted for optimal exposure to the fracture site. Although the conventional approach involves repair of the pronator quadratus, controversy surrounds the merits of this repair. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional outcomes of patients with distal radius fractures treated with pronator quadratus repair after volar plate fixation versus no pronator quadratus repair. A systematic search was conducted in Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, on 23 July 2015. All studies comparing pronator quadratus repair with no pronator quadratus repair in adult patients undergoing volar plate fixation for distal radius fractures were included. The primary outcome was the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included range of motion, grip strength, post-operative pain and complications. A total of 169 patients were included, of which 95 underwent pronator quadratus repair, while 74 patients underwent no pronator quadratus repair. At 12 months follow-up no statistically significant differences in DASH-scores and range of motion were observed between pronator quadratus repair and no repair. Moreover, post-operative pain and complication rates were similar between both groups. At 12 months of follow-up, we do not see any advantages of pronator quadratus repair after volar plate fixation in the distal radius. However, a definitive conclusion cannot be drawn from this systematic review due to a lack of available evidence

Three-dimensional virtual planning of corrective osteotomies of distal radius malunions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The purpose of this study was to summarize and evaluate results of three-dimensional (3D-) planned corrective osteotomies of malunited distal radius fractures. 3D-planning techniques provide the possibility to address 3D-deformity that conventional planning methods might not address. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library for studies that performed a 3D-planned corrective osteotomy on patients with a malunited distal radius fracture. Fifteen studies with a total of 68 patients were included in the analysis. In 96% of cases, the preoperatively present palmar tilt, radial inclination and ulnar variance showed statistically significant improvement postoperatively with restoration to within 5° or 2 mm of their normal values. Mean flexion–extension, pro-supination and grip strength showed statistically significant improvement (p < 0.05). Complications were reported in 11 out of 68 patients (16%). With the current advances in 3D printing technology, 3D-planned corrective osteotomies seem a promising technique in the treatment of complex distal radius malunions. Level of evidence IV Systematic review of case series, Level IV

External validation of clinical decision rules for children with wrist trauma

Background: Clinical decision rules help to avoid potentially unnecessary radiographs of the wrist, reduce waiting times and save costs. Objective: The primary aim of this study was to provide an overview of all existing non-validated clinical decision rules for wrist trauma in children and to externally validate these rules in a different cohort of patients. Secondarily, we aimed to compare the performance of these rules with the validated Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules. Materials and methods: We included all studies that proposed a clinical prediction or decision rule in children presenting at the emergency department with acute wrist trauma. We performed external validation within a cohort of 379 children. We also calculated the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of each decision rule. Results: We included three clinical decision rules. The sensitivity and specificity of all clinical decision rules after external validation were between 94% and 99%, and 11% and 26%, respectively. After external validation 7% to 17% less radiographs would be ordered and 1.4% to 5.7% of all fractures would be missed. Compared to the Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules only one of the three other rules had a higher sensitivity; however both the specificity and the reduction in requested radiographs were lower in the other three rules. Conclusion: The sensitivity of the three non-validated clinical decision rules is high. However the specificity and the reduction in number of requested radiographs are low. In contrast, the validated Amsterdam Pediatric Wrist Rules has an acceptable sensitivity and the greatest reduction in radiographs, at 22%, without missing any clinically relevant fractures

Operative Treatment of Intra-Articular Distal Radius Fractures With versus Without Arthroscopy

__Background:__ In the past several years, an increase in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for intra-articular distal radius fractures has been observed. This technique leads to a quicker recovery of function compared to non-operative treatment. However, some patients continue to have a painful and stiff wrist postoperatively. Arthroscopically assisted removal of intra-articular fracture haematoma and debris may improve the functional outcomes following operative treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures. The purpose of this randomised controlled trial is to determine the difference in functional outcome, assessed with the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score, after ORIF with and without an additional wrist arthroscopy in adult patients with displaced complete articular distal radius fractures. __Methods:__ In this multicentre trial, adult patients with a displaced complete articular distal radius fracture are randomised between ORIF with an additional wrist arthroscopy to remove fracture haematoma and debris (intervention group) and conventional fluoroscopic-assisted ORIF (control group). The primary outcome is functional outcome assessed with the PRWE score after three months. Secondary outcomes are wrist function assessed with the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, postoperative pain, range of motion, grip strength, complications and cost-effectiveness. Additionally, in the intervention group, the quality of reduction, associated ligamentous injuries and cartilage damage will be assessed. A total of 50 patients will be included in this study. __Discussion:___ Although ORIF of intra-articular distal radi

Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS)

Background and purpose — The lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) is a well-known and validated instrument for measurement of lower extremity function. The LEFS was developed in a group of patients with various musculoskeletal disorders, and no reference data for the healthy population are available. Here we provide normative data for the LEFS. Methods — Healthy visitors and staff at 4 hospitals were requested to participate. A minimum of 250 volunteers had to be included at each hospital. Participants were excluded if they had undergone lower extremity surgery within 1 year of filling out the questionnaire, or were scheduled for lower extremity surgery. Normative values for the LEFS for the population as a whole were calculated. Furthermore, the influence of sex, age, type of employment, socioeconomic status, and history o

Arthroscopic debridement does not enhance surgical treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures: a randomized controlled trial

The aim of this study was to determine the difference in functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with and without arthroscopic debridement in adults with displaced intra-articular distal radius fractures. In this multicentre trial, 50 patients were randomized between ORIF with or without arthroscopic debridement. The primary outcome measure was the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score. Secondary outcome measures were Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, pain scores, range of wrist motion, grip strength, and complications. Median PRWE was worse for the intervention group at 3 months and was equal for both groups at 12 months. The secondary outcome measures did not show consistent patterns of differences at different time-points of follow-up. We conclude that patients treated with additional arthroscopy to remove intra-articular hematoma and debris did not have better outcomes than those treated with ORIF alone. We therefore do not recommend arthroscopy for removal of hematoma and debris when surgically fixing distal radius fractures. Level of evidence: