Search

Distal radius fractures are often treated conservatively with immobilization. Immobilizing above the elbow limits forearm rotation, though recent literature has suggested the effects on radiographic or functional outcomes may be negligible. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze the radiographic and functional outcome scores of distal radius fractures managed with short-arm (SA) immobilization and long-arm (LA) immobilization. An electronic systematic search was performed of the PubMed and EMBASE databases from inception to October 5, 2022. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with acute distal radius fractures undergoing nonoperative treatment (involving application/maintenance of immobilization) comparing above-elbow versus below-elbow constructs were included. The outcomes of interest were changes in radiographic parameters (loss of volar tilt [VT], radial height [RH], and radial inclination [RI]), loss of reduction, requirement for surgery, and patient-reported functional outcomes (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, or Hand [DASH] or Quick DASH survey). The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 was used for study quality assessment. The effect size of the interventions was assessed using random effect models to calculate mean differences (MDs) for continuous variables and odds ratios (ORs) for categorical variables. Standardized mean difference (SMD) was calculated for patient-reported functional outcome scores. Nine studies involving 983 cases were included, including 497 SA and 486 LA. No statistically significant differences were observed with regards to VT ( P  = 0.83), RH ( P  = 0.81), RI ( P  = 0.35), loss of reduction ( P  = 0.33), requirement for surgery ( P  = 0.33), or patient-reported functional outcomes ( P  = 0.10). There was no difference in radiographic outcomes, need for surgery, or functional scores among patients treated with SA and LA immobilization. Utilizing SA immobilization is a safe option for conservative management of distal radius fractures and the benefits of mitigating complications associated with LA immobilization may supersede the theoretical limited forearm rotational stability observed with SA immobilization. Further study is required to determine the optimal method of SA immobilization., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright © 2024, Chaudhry et al.)

Purpose: Longitudinal radioulnar dissociation (LRD) is an injury often missed upon initial presentation. A recent study examined a radiographic screening test in cadavers that showed increased interosseous distance when the interosseous ligament (IOL) was divided. For this test to be clinically useful, it is necessary for uninjured forearms to have similar interosseous spaces. The purpose of this study was to determine the typical differences between right and left interosseous spaces of healthy individuals., Methods: Anterior-posterior x-rays of bilateral forearms in maximum supination of 28 surgical residents with no history of injury were obtained. These images were uploaded into a picture archiving and communication system and then digitized. The length of the radius was measured (X r ). The maximum interosseous distance (D max ) between the radius and ulna as well as the interosseous distance at a location 0.3 X r from the distal radioulnar joint was measured. The right and left arm distances were compared. Also, an outlier analysis was used to evaluate forearm rotational asymmetry between right and left arms., Results: The outlier analysis revealed two sets of forearm x-rays were rotationally different compared to the rest of the group due to asymmetric arm positioning; these data were excluded from the analysis. The average difference in D max was 1.7 mm (standard deviation [SD] 1.5) between right and left arms, and this was found at a position of 0.28 X r on average. The difference in interosseous distance measured at a fixed location 0.3 X r was 1.6 mm (SD 1.5). No significant difference was found between the paired right and left arms for D max or at 0.3 X r ., Conclusions: There does not appear to be any significant difference between the maximum interosseous distance of right and left arms in healthy individuals. Therefore, analyzing bilateral forearm x-rays may be a simple LRD screening test., Clinical Relevance: Understanding the degree of normal variation in the forearm bone spacing might inform evaluation of abnormal forearm bone alignment resulting from LRD., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Common forms of fixation of metacarpal fractures have historically included percutaneous Kirschner wire fixation, plates and screws, and, more recently, intramedullary screw fixation. Retrograde intramedullary screws (RISs) are a novel modality first described 10 years ago. The purpose of this review is to critically evaluate the published literature assessing outcomes of RIS fixation for metacarpal fractures and create a complication profile for this novel technique. A comprehensive literature search was performed using electronic databases for both clinical and biomechanical studies in relation to RIS fixation published from 2000 to 2020. A total of 19 studies (13 clinical and 6 biomechanical) met the inclusion criteria. The clinical studies examined 603 metacarpal fractures and demonstrated adequate functional outcomes in terms of grip strength, total active motion, and time to return to work. The biomechanical studies examined 80 metacarpal fractures, finding that load to failure in RISs was often equal to or higher than Kirschner wires but less than plate and screws. The complication rate in reviewed studies was 2.8%, with the most prevalent complications being stiffness and extension lag. RIS use in metacarpal fractures appears to provide adequate stability with satisfactory clinical outcomes and minimal complications, although more high-quality studies are needed to fully examine this modality.

Purpose of Review: Ulnar-sided wrist pain is a challenging diagnostic workup. A thorough and complete physical examination followed by appropriate radiographic studies can help the clinician diagnose and treat these conditions., Recent Findings: Recent research has been focused on diagnostic modalities such as arthroscopy and high-resolution MRI. Ulnar-sided wrist pain is a challenging clinical workup that must be approached systematically with the aid of adjunctive diagnostic modalities., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Unlabelled: Reference/Citation : Paterson WH, Throckmorton TW, Koester M, Azar FM, Kuhn JE. Position and duration of immobilization after primary anterior shoulder dislocation: a systemic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92(18):2924-2933., Clinical Question: Does an optimum duration and position of immobilization after primary anterior shoulder dislocation exist for reducing recurrence rates?, Data Sources: MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched up to December 2009 without limitations. The search terms for all databases used were shoulder AND dislocation and shoulder AND immobilization., Study Selection: Criteria used to include articles were (1) English language, (2) prospective level I or level II studies (according to Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery guidelines), (3) nonoperative management of initial anterior shoulder dislocation, (4) minimum follow-up of 1 year, and (5) rate of recurrent dislocation as a reported outcome., Data Extraction: A standardized evaluation method was used to extract data to allow assessment of methods issues and statistical analysis to determine sources of bias. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate after nonoperative management of anterior shoulder dislocation. Additional data extracted and used in subanalyses included duration and position of immobilization and age at the time of initial dislocation. Data were analyzed to determine associations among groups using 2-tailed Fisher exact tests. For pooled categorical data, relative risk of recurrent dislocation, 95% confidence intervals, and heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic and χ(2) tests were calculated for individual studies. The Mantel-Haenszel method was used to combine studies and estimate overall relative risk of recurrent dislocation and 95% confidence intervals. The statistical difference between duration of immobilization and position was determined using z tests for overall effect. Pooled results were presented as forest plots., Main Results: In the initial search of the databases, the authors identified 2083 articles. A total of 9 studies met all of the criteria and were included in this review. In most of the studies, age was a risk factor for recurrence. Patients less than 30 years of age were more likely to sustain a recurrent dislocation than patients more than 30 years of age. In 5 studies (n = 1215), researchers found no difference in recurrence of shoulder dislocation when immobilized in internal rotation (IR) for less than 1 week (41%, 40 of 97) compared with more than 3 weeks (37%, 34 of 93) in patients less than 30 years of age (P = .52). Authors of 3 studies (n = 289) compared the effect of immobilization in IR versus external rotation (ER), and whereas they found no statistical difference, a trend appeared toward reduced recurrence rates in ER but not IR (P = .07). The rate of recurrent dislocation was 40% (25 of 63) in patients treated with IR sling immobilization and 25% (22 of 88) in patients immobilized in ER., Conclusions: Overall, the investigators found that younger age (<30 years) was a predictor of recurrent dislocations, immobilization for more than 1 week did not improve recurrence rates, and an apparent trend existed toward decreased recurrence rates with ER rather than IR. According to the review and meta-analysis by Paterson et al, the level of evidence for recommendations regarding optimal duration and position of immobilization to reduce the risk of recurrent dislocation was therapeutic level II. This level of evidence was appropriate because the review included only prospective studies of level I or II and a minimum follow-up of 1 year.