Reduction and Association of the Scaphoid and Lunate Versus Internal Brace for Scapholunate Ligament Reconstruction.

IF 1.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
HAND Pub Date : 2026-11-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-15 DOI:10.1177/15589447251414125
Michelle Richardson, Adam Margalit, Gerardo Sanchez, Peter Ren, Samara Moll, Liana Tedesco, Jadie De Tolla, Jacques Hacquebord, Omri Ayalon
{"title":"Reduction and Association of the Scaphoid and Lunate Versus Internal Brace for Scapholunate Ligament Reconstruction.","authors":"Michelle Richardson, Adam Margalit, Gerardo Sanchez, Peter Ren, Samara Moll, Liana Tedesco, Jadie De Tolla, Jacques Hacquebord, Omri Ayalon","doi":"10.1177/15589447251414125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes in patients with isolated unrepairable scapholunate (SL) injuries treated with the reduction and association of the scaphoid and lunate (RASL) screw technique versus suture anchors with an internal brace (IB).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients treated with either the RASL screw or IB technique for a complete, nonrepairable SL injury were identified. Radiographic and clinical data were recorded preoperatively, immediate postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Patients were then contacted via telephone survey, and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (qDASH) questionnaire was administered. Patients with less than 6 months of follow-up were excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-five patients (19 men, 6 women) with an average age of 43 (range = 23-66) years were identified (RASL = 14 and IB = 11). There were no differences between groups in radiographic parameters or range of motion at final follow-up, except for a smaller SL gap at final follow-up in RASL patients (1.5 vs 2.4 mm, P = .03). Four patients in the RASL (29%) group required additional procedures for screw removal secondary to screw breakage (n = 1) or screw migration/loosening (n = 3). One patient in the IB group had complete failure/diastasis postoperatively, and 36% (4/11) of patients had osteolysis at final follow-up. At final follow-up, qDASH was 26 versus 31 in the IB versus RASL groups (P = .79).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both RASL and IB have similar postoperative outcomes when treating SL injuries. It is important to note complications of screw breakage/loosening associated with RASL and recurrent diastasis/gapping and high rate of osteolysis with IB, although this has an unknown clinical significance.</p>","PeriodicalId":12902,"journal":{"name":"HAND","volume":" ","pages":"1659-1667"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12909137/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HAND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15589447251414125","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes in patients with isolated unrepairable scapholunate (SL) injuries treated with the reduction and association of the scaphoid and lunate (RASL) screw technique versus suture anchors with an internal brace (IB).

Methods: Patients treated with either the RASL screw or IB technique for a complete, nonrepairable SL injury were identified. Radiographic and clinical data were recorded preoperatively, immediate postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Patients were then contacted via telephone survey, and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (qDASH) questionnaire was administered. Patients with less than 6 months of follow-up were excluded.

Results: Twenty-five patients (19 men, 6 women) with an average age of 43 (range = 23-66) years were identified (RASL = 14 and IB = 11). There were no differences between groups in radiographic parameters or range of motion at final follow-up, except for a smaller SL gap at final follow-up in RASL patients (1.5 vs 2.4 mm, P = .03). Four patients in the RASL (29%) group required additional procedures for screw removal secondary to screw breakage (n = 1) or screw migration/loosening (n = 3). One patient in the IB group had complete failure/diastasis postoperatively, and 36% (4/11) of patients had osteolysis at final follow-up. At final follow-up, qDASH was 26 versus 31 in the IB versus RASL groups (P = .79).

Conclusions: Both RASL and IB have similar postoperative outcomes when treating SL injuries. It is important to note complications of screw breakage/loosening associated with RASL and recurrent diastasis/gapping and high rate of osteolysis with IB, although this has an unknown clinical significance.

舟月骨韧带重建中舟月骨复位联合与内支架的比较。
背景:本研究的目的是比较孤立的不可修复的舟月骨(SL)损伤患者采用舟月骨和月骨(RASL)螺钉复位和联合技术与内支架(IB)缝合锚钉治疗的结果。方法:采用RASL螺钉或IB技术治疗完全性、不可修复的SL损伤的患者。术前、术后及最后随访时记录影像学和临床资料。然后通过电话调查与患者联系,并进行手臂,肩膀和手的快速残疾(qDASH)问卷调查。随访时间少于6个月的患者被排除。结果:25例患者(男19例,女6例),平均年龄43岁(范围23 ~ 66岁),RASL = 14, IB = 11。除了RASL患者最终随访时SL间隙较小(1.5 mm vs 2.4 mm, P = .03)外,两组之间在放射学参数或活动范围方面没有差异。RASL组中有4例(29%)患者因螺钉断裂(n = 1)或螺钉移动/松动(n = 3)需要进行额外的螺钉拆卸手术。IB组1例患者术后完全失活/转移,36%(4/11)患者在最终随访时出现骨溶解。在最终随访时,IB组和RASL组的qDASH分别为26和31 (P = 0.79)。结论:RASL和IB治疗SL损伤的术后效果相似。值得注意的是,与RASL相关的螺钉断裂/松动、复发性移位/间隙和IB高溶骨率的并发症,尽管其临床意义尚不清楚。
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
HAND
HAND Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
209
期刊介绍: HAND is the official journal of the American Association for Hand Surgery and is a peer-reviewed journal featuring articles written by clinicians worldwide presenting current research and clinical work in the field of hand surgery. It features articles related to all aspects of hand and upper extremity surgery and the post operative care and rehabilitation of the hand.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书