Intramedullary Fixation for Metacarpal Fractures: A Multi-Institutional Prospective Outcomes Study

Q3 Medicine
Michael B. Gehring MD , Brandon Wolfe BA , Riley Kahan BS , Stephanie D. Malliaris MD , Kia M. Washington MD , Matthew D. Folchert MD , Kyros Ipaktchi MD , Mark A. Greyson MD , Alexander Lauder MD , Matthew L. Iorio MD
{"title":"Intramedullary Fixation for Metacarpal Fractures: A Multi-Institutional Prospective Outcomes Study","authors":"Michael B. Gehring MD ,&nbsp;Brandon Wolfe BA ,&nbsp;Riley Kahan BS ,&nbsp;Stephanie D. Malliaris MD ,&nbsp;Kia M. Washington MD ,&nbsp;Matthew D. Folchert MD ,&nbsp;Kyros Ipaktchi MD ,&nbsp;Mark A. Greyson MD ,&nbsp;Alexander Lauder MD ,&nbsp;Matthew L. Iorio MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jhsg.2024.08.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Intramedullary fixation (IMF) has emerged as an effective treatment for metacarpal fractures. Benefits include stable fixation that allows early postoperative rehabilitation and high fracture union rates, without increased complications. Both headless compression screws and intramedullary threaded noncompressive nails have been described for this purpose; however, prospective outcomes reporting are lacking. This study assessed the outcomes of metacarpal fractures treated with IMF including patient-reported outcomes, grip strength, total active motion, and complications.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A prospective multicenter trial enrolled consecutive patients with closed, extra-articular metacarpal fractures treated with IMF. Radiographic healing was assessed at each postoperative visit and patient-reported outcomes included pain scores, <em>Quick</em>DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand), and Short Form Survey scores. Grip strength, goniometric motion measurements, and complications were also obtained.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>One-hundred-one fractures were treated in 82 patients with an average age of 33 years and mean follow-up of 69 days. Most patients were male (70%), nonlaborers (72%), and nonsmokers (74%). <em>Quick</em>DASH scores improved by 40 points, with a final mean of 17 following metacarpal IMF. Short Form Survey components of physical component score and mental component score at final follow-up were 55.95 and 48.74, respectively. Final average grip strength was 15 kg and total active motion was 228º. The average total active motion of the closed reduction cohort (249°) was significantly higher than the open cohort (210°) at final follow-up (<em>P</em> &lt; 0.05). Four complications (3.9%) occurred, including one hardware failure, two proximal screw migrations, and one metacarpophalangeal joint contracture, with three of these patients requiring revision surgery.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Intramedullary fixation is a reliable technique for treatment of extra-articular metacarpal fractures with satisfactory patient-reported outcomes, excellent strength and motion, and a low complication rate. Intramedullary fixation should be considered for closed, extra-articular metacarpal fractures.</div></div><div><h3>Type of study/level of evidence</h3><div>Therapeutic IV.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36920,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online","volume":"7 1","pages":"Pages 48-55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S258951412400197X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Intramedullary fixation (IMF) has emerged as an effective treatment for metacarpal fractures. Benefits include stable fixation that allows early postoperative rehabilitation and high fracture union rates, without increased complications. Both headless compression screws and intramedullary threaded noncompressive nails have been described for this purpose; however, prospective outcomes reporting are lacking. This study assessed the outcomes of metacarpal fractures treated with IMF including patient-reported outcomes, grip strength, total active motion, and complications.

Methods

A prospective multicenter trial enrolled consecutive patients with closed, extra-articular metacarpal fractures treated with IMF. Radiographic healing was assessed at each postoperative visit and patient-reported outcomes included pain scores, QuickDASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand), and Short Form Survey scores. Grip strength, goniometric motion measurements, and complications were also obtained.

Results

One-hundred-one fractures were treated in 82 patients with an average age of 33 years and mean follow-up of 69 days. Most patients were male (70%), nonlaborers (72%), and nonsmokers (74%). QuickDASH scores improved by 40 points, with a final mean of 17 following metacarpal IMF. Short Form Survey components of physical component score and mental component score at final follow-up were 55.95 and 48.74, respectively. Final average grip strength was 15 kg and total active motion was 228º. The average total active motion of the closed reduction cohort (249°) was significantly higher than the open cohort (210°) at final follow-up (P < 0.05). Four complications (3.9%) occurred, including one hardware failure, two proximal screw migrations, and one metacarpophalangeal joint contracture, with three of these patients requiring revision surgery.

Conclusions

Intramedullary fixation is a reliable technique for treatment of extra-articular metacarpal fractures with satisfactory patient-reported outcomes, excellent strength and motion, and a low complication rate. Intramedullary fixation should be considered for closed, extra-articular metacarpal fractures.

Type of study/level of evidence

Therapeutic IV.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
111
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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