Comparison of Closed and Open Surgical Technique for Second to Fifth Metacarpal Shaft Fractures: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study in a Dutch City Population

Surgeries Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.3390/surgeries5020024
M. Quax, Maarten Kielman, Sven Albert Meylaerts, Alexander Pieter Antony Greeven
{"title":"Comparison of Closed and Open Surgical Technique for Second to Fifth Metacarpal Shaft Fractures: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study in a Dutch City Population","authors":"M. Quax, Maarten Kielman, Sven Albert Meylaerts, Alexander Pieter Antony Greeven","doi":"10.3390/surgeries5020024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study was to assess surgical treatment in metacarpal shaft fractures of the second to fifth ray to determine the functional outcomes and complications in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF). This was a retrospective study that included patients with metacarpal shaft fractures of the second to fifth rays who were treated surgically between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2019. Functional outcomes were scored using the QuickDASH and Eq5D score. A total of 231 treated patients were included. Single fractures were seen in 180 patients, and multiple fractures in 51 patients. ORIF was applied in 141 patients and CRIF in 90 patients. The functional outcomes were not significantly different between the groups. Complications were found in 41 (29%) of the ORIF patients and 15 (17%) of the CRIF patients. The functional outcomes after single or multiple metacarpal shaft fractures were similar in the ORIF and CRIF patients. ORIF showed significantly more complications, such as functional impairment and infections and a higher reoperation rate. In conclusion, CRIF is as safe as ORIF for the surgical treatment of metacarpal shaft fractures in terms of its functional outcome and slightly preferable due to its lower complication rate.","PeriodicalId":506240,"journal":{"name":"Surgeries","volume":" 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgeries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/surgeries5020024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess surgical treatment in metacarpal shaft fractures of the second to fifth ray to determine the functional outcomes and complications in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF). This was a retrospective study that included patients with metacarpal shaft fractures of the second to fifth rays who were treated surgically between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2019. Functional outcomes were scored using the QuickDASH and Eq5D score. A total of 231 treated patients were included. Single fractures were seen in 180 patients, and multiple fractures in 51 patients. ORIF was applied in 141 patients and CRIF in 90 patients. The functional outcomes were not significantly different between the groups. Complications were found in 41 (29%) of the ORIF patients and 15 (17%) of the CRIF patients. The functional outcomes after single or multiple metacarpal shaft fractures were similar in the ORIF and CRIF patients. ORIF showed significantly more complications, such as functional impairment and infections and a higher reoperation rate. In conclusion, CRIF is as safe as ORIF for the surgical treatment of metacarpal shaft fractures in terms of its functional outcome and slightly preferable due to its lower complication rate.
第二至第五掌骨轴骨折闭合与开放手术技术的比较:一项针对荷兰城市人口的多中心回顾性研究
本研究旨在评估第二至第五根掌骨轴骨折的手术治疗,以确定开放复位内固定术(ORIF)与闭合复位内固定术(CRIF)的功能效果和并发症。这是一项回顾性研究,纳入了在2007年1月1日至2019年12月31日期间接受手术治疗的第二至第五桡骨掌骨骨折患者。功能结果采用 QuickDASH 和 Eq5D 评分。共纳入 231 名接受治疗的患者。180例患者为单发骨折,51例患者为多发骨折。141名患者接受了有椎体后凸成形术,90名患者接受了无椎体后凸成形术。两组患者的功能结果无明显差异。ORIF患者中有41人(29%)出现并发症,CRIF患者中有15人(17%)出现并发症。ORIF和CRIF患者在单根或多根掌骨骨折后的功能预后相似。ORIF的并发症(如功能障碍和感染)明显较多,再次手术率也较高。总之,就功能结果而言,CRIF与ORIF一样是治疗掌骨干骨折的安全手术,由于并发症发生率较低,CRIF略胜一筹。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信