Faruqui Safi, Stern Peter J, Kiefhaber Thomas R
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Hand Surgery, Naval Medical Center Portsmouth, Portsmouth, VA 237008-2197, USA.
J Hand Surg Am. 2012 Jul;37(7):1342-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2012.04.019.
Two common techniques for fixation of extra-articular fractures at the proximal phalanx base are transarticular (across the metacarpophalangeal joint) and extra-articular cross-pinning. The aim of this study was to assess the complications and outcomes of these 2 techniques. Our hypothesis was that transarticular and extra-articular closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of base of proximal phalanx fractures have similar complication rates and outcomes.
A retrospective chart review identified 338 patients with base of proximal phalanx fractures. We treated 50 isolated fractures with closed reduction and percutaneous pinning using 1 of 2 techniques: transarticular (25 fractures through the metacarpal head) or extra-articular (25 fractures cross-pinned through the base of the proximal phalanx). Outcome measures included total active motion and complications.
We found a substantial overall complication rate in both groups. The mean total active motion for the transarticular group and cross-pinning group was 201° and 198°, respectively. Proximal interphalangeal joint motion was notably affected; nearly half of the patients in each group had flexion loss greater than 20° (average, 27°) at the proximal interphalangeal joint. Nearly a third of patients in both groups had fixed flexion contracture greater than 15° at the proximal interphalangeal joint. There were more secondary procedures in the transarticular group (6) than in the cross-pinning group (2). There was no statistical significance between groups in any of the outcome parameters used.
Closed pinning minimizes additional soft tissue injury and allows for early motion, but neither fixation method was superior in terms of the measured parameters. In addition, overall results were not as good as what has been reported in the literature.
近端指骨基底关节外骨折的两种常见固定技术是经关节(穿过掌指关节)和关节外交叉克氏针固定。本研究的目的是评估这两种技术的并发症和疗效。我们的假设是,近端指骨基底骨折的经关节和关节外闭合复位及经皮克氏针固定具有相似的并发症发生率和疗效。
一项回顾性病历审查确定了338例近端指骨基底骨折患者。我们采用两种技术之一对50例孤立性骨折进行了闭合复位和经皮克氏针固定:经关节(25例骨折穿过掌骨头)或关节外(25例骨折通过近端指骨基底交叉克氏针固定)。疗效指标包括总主动活动度和并发症。
我们发现两组的总体并发症发生率都很高。经关节组和交叉克氏针固定组的平均总主动活动度分别为201°和198°。近端指间关节活动明显受限;每组近一半的患者近端指间关节屈曲丧失大于20°(平均27°)。两组近三分之一的患者近端指间关节存在大于15°的固定性屈曲挛缩。经关节组的二次手术(6例)比交叉克氏针固定组(2例)多。在所用的任何疗效参数上,两组之间均无统计学意义。
经皮克氏针固定可将额外的软组织损伤降至最低,并允许早期活动,但就所测量的参数而言,两种固定方法均无优势。此外,总体结果不如文献报道的好。