{"title":"Intramedullary tension band technique versus distal ulnar hook plate in treating the fifth metatarsal base fractures.","authors":"Jingquan Guo, Qianwen Jia, Fei Xiao, Keke Cheng, Tianrun Lei, Bo Wu","doi":"10.1053/j.jfas.2025.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Displaced or comminuted fifth metatarsal base fractures remain challenging, with no consensus on optimal surgical treatment.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare clinical outcomes between intramedullary tension-band and distal ulna hook plate fixation for treating Zone 1 (tuberosity avulsion) fractures of the fifth.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study included 43 patients with Zone 1 fractures treated surgically between August 2019 and August 2023. Patients were divided into two groups: 22 treated with intramedullary tension-band and 21 treated with hook plate fixation. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were assessed, including operative time, incision length, reduction quality, fracture healing time, AOFAS scores at 3, 6, and 12 months, and postoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The tension-band group showed significantly shorter operative time (28.4 ± 3.2 vs. 48.9 ± 8.6 min, P < 0.01) and smaller incisions (3.5 ± 0.3 vs. 6.1 ± 0.6 cm, P < 0.01), with no cases of implant irritation or nerve symptoms. The hook plate group achieved better immediate reduction (0.2 ± 0.2 vs. 0.7 ± 0.3 mm, P = 0.01), faster union (6 vs. 8 weeks, P < 0.01), and higher AOFAS scores at 3 months (P < 0.01). However, functional outcomes were similar at 6 and 12 months. Both groups achieved complete fracture union.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both techniques are effective for Zone 1 fifth metatarsal base fractures. Tension-band fixation offers a less invasive alternative with reduced morbidity and need for implant removal, while the hook plate provides faster early recovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":50191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2025.07.001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Displaced or comminuted fifth metatarsal base fractures remain challenging, with no consensus on optimal surgical treatment.
Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes between intramedullary tension-band and distal ulna hook plate fixation for treating Zone 1 (tuberosity avulsion) fractures of the fifth.
Study design: Retrospective cohort study.
Methods: This study included 43 patients with Zone 1 fractures treated surgically between August 2019 and August 2023. Patients were divided into two groups: 22 treated with intramedullary tension-band and 21 treated with hook plate fixation. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were assessed, including operative time, incision length, reduction quality, fracture healing time, AOFAS scores at 3, 6, and 12 months, and postoperative complications.
Results: The tension-band group showed significantly shorter operative time (28.4 ± 3.2 vs. 48.9 ± 8.6 min, P < 0.01) and smaller incisions (3.5 ± 0.3 vs. 6.1 ± 0.6 cm, P < 0.01), with no cases of implant irritation or nerve symptoms. The hook plate group achieved better immediate reduction (0.2 ± 0.2 vs. 0.7 ± 0.3 mm, P = 0.01), faster union (6 vs. 8 weeks, P < 0.01), and higher AOFAS scores at 3 months (P < 0.01). However, functional outcomes were similar at 6 and 12 months. Both groups achieved complete fracture union.
Conclusion: Both techniques are effective for Zone 1 fifth metatarsal base fractures. Tension-band fixation offers a less invasive alternative with reduced morbidity and need for implant removal, while the hook plate provides faster early recovery.
背景:移位或粉碎性第五跖骨基底骨折仍然具有挑战性,对于最佳手术治疗尚无共识。目的:比较髓内张力带与远端尺骨钩钢板内固定治疗第五节1区(结节撕脱性)骨折的临床效果。研究设计:回顾性队列研究。方法:本研究纳入2019年8月至2023年8月手术治疗的43例1区骨折患者。患者分为两组:22例采用髓内张力带固定,21例采用钩钢板固定。评估临床和影像学结果,包括手术时间、切口长度、复位质量、骨折愈合时间、3、6和12个月的AOFAS评分以及术后并发症。结果:张力带组手术时间明显缩短(28.4±3.2 vs 48.9±8.6 min, P < 0.01),切口更小(3.5±0.3 vs 6.1±0.6 cm, P < 0.01),无种植体刺激及神经症状。钩钢板组即刻复位效果较好(0.2±0.2 vs. 0.7±0.3 mm, P = 0.01),愈合速度较快(6 vs. 8周,P < 0.01), 3个月时AOFAS评分较高(P < 0.01)。然而,在6个月和12个月时,功能结果相似。两组均实现骨折完全愈合。结论:两种方法治疗第五跖底1区骨折均有效。张力带固定提供了一种侵入性较小的替代方法,降低了发病率和移除植入物的需要,而钩钢板提供了更快的早期恢复。
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery is the leading source for original, clinically-focused articles on the surgical and medical management of the foot and ankle. Each bi-monthly, peer-reviewed issue addresses relevant topics to the profession, such as: adult reconstruction of the forefoot; adult reconstruction of the hindfoot and ankle; diabetes; medicine/rheumatology; pediatrics; research; sports medicine; trauma; and tumors.