Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
American University of Integrative Sciences, Tucker, GA, USA.
Hand (N Y). 2022 Dec;17(1_suppl):118S-128S. doi: 10.1177/15589447221081864. Epub 2022 Apr 2.
Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are among the most common fractures in the United States. Despite their high incidence, there is no consensus on the optimal type of cast or splint to treat these fractures. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the available literature pertaining to the outcomes for different constructs used to conservatively treat DRFs. A literature search of PubMed, Medline, and Embase was conducted to identify research comparing the outcomes of various immobilization mechanisms. In particular, endpoints included complications (eg, loss of reduction, pain), radiographic outcomes, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. A total of 1655 articles were identified during the literature search, and 22 ultimately fulfilled inclusion criteria. These 22 studies included 1826 conservatively treated DRFs. The different immobilization mechanisms were divided into 8 groupings: above-elbow casts, above-elbow splints, below-elbow casts, below-elbow splints, gutter or spica casts, gutter or spica splints, dorsal-volar splints, and dorsal splints. Qualitative review of the studies determined that below-elbow constructs result in equal or better functional and radiologic outcomes when compared with above-elbow constructs. Meta-analysis demonstrated that a statistically significant difference ( = .04) existed in the incidence of loss of reduction between the immobilization constructs, although post hoc analysis did not detect significant differences between 2 particular constructs.
桡骨远端骨折(DRF)是美国最常见的骨折之一。尽管其发病率很高,但对于治疗这些骨折的最佳石膏或夹板类型仍没有共识。本系统评价的目的是评估有关保守治疗 DRF 不同结构的可用文献,以评估其结果。对 PubMed、Medline 和 Embase 进行了文献检索,以确定比较各种固定机制结果的研究。特别是,终点包括并发症(例如,复位丢失、疼痛)、影像学结果和上肢功能障碍(DASH)评分。文献检索共确定了 1655 篇文章,最终有 22 篇符合纳入标准。这 22 项研究包括 1826 例保守治疗的 DRF。不同的固定机制分为 8 组:肘上石膏、肘上夹板、肘下石膏、肘下夹板、管型或螺旋夹板、管型或螺旋夹板、背侧-掌侧夹板和背侧夹板。对研究的定性评价确定,与肘上结构相比,肘下结构导致的功能和影像学结果相等或更好。荟萃分析表明,固定结构之间复位丢失的发生率存在统计学显著差异(=0.04),尽管事后分析并未检测到两种特定结构之间存在显著差异。