4.2 Article

Outcome Analysis of Metacarpal and Phalangeal Fixation Techniques at Bellevue Hospital

期刊

ANNALS OF PLASTIC SURGERY
卷 81, 期 4, 页码 407-410

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001581

关键词

fixation; fractures; hand fracture; K-wire; metacarpal; phalangeal; plate; stabilization

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Phalangeal fractures represent a significant portion of upper extremity injuries but are not well studied as a single entity. We define our approach at a level 1 trauma center and determine whether plating or lag screws (ie, rigid fixation) have superior functional outcomes compared with Kirschner wire fixation for phalangeal or metacarpal fractures. Methods We performed a systematic review of all surgically managed hand fracture cases at Bellevue Hospital during 2012 and 2013. Demographics, type of fixation, length of operation, period of immobilization, range of motion, time to return to work, and complications including reoperation were noted. Comparisons were assessed for significance using Student t tests and Fisher exact test (P < 0.05 considered significant). Results One hundred ninety-two fractures (158 patients) were treated and followed for an average of 113 days. Rigid fixation was used for 17 (19%) of 90 metacarpal fractures and 5 (5%) of 102 phalangeal fractures. Operative times were significantly shorter (59 vs 135 minutes, 84 vs 149 minutes), and period of immobilization was longer (37 vs 15 days, 34 vs 18 days) when Kirschner wires were used for metacarpal and phalangeal fractures, respectively (P > 0.05). Total active motion and return to work were similar regardless of type of intervention in both fracture types. No patients treated with rigid fixation required reoperation. Conclusions To our best knowledge, this is the first review to study phalangeal fractures concurrently but also separately from metacarpal fractures. Despite shorter periods of immobilization, rigid fixation does not appear to lead to improved total active motion or time to return to work.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据