van der Oest Mark J W, Duraku Liron S, Artan Madina, Hundepool Caroline A, Power Dominic M, Rajaratnam Vaikunthan, Zuidam J Michiel
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Birmingham Hand Centre, Queen Elisabeth Hospital, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
J Wrist Surg. 2021 Oct 5;11(2):164-176. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1735841. eCollection 2022 Apr.
Perilunate injuries are uncommon yet challenging and often missed injuries, representing 7% of all carpal traumas. Two types of injuries can be identified as follows: perilunate dislocations (PLD) and perilunate fracture-dislocations (PLFD). The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to establish which surgical treatment is superior for patients with perilunate injuries and the significance of delayed treatment. A total of 2056 articles were screened, and 16 articles were included. Risk of bias for case-control series and case series were assessed through the National Institute of Health study quality assessment tool. Qualitative outcomes of clinical scores for hand function were compared between different time points (acute, < 7 days; delayed 7-45 days; chronic > 45 days), open and closed reduction, and PLD and PLFD. Overall, the clinical outcome scores of patients treated within 7 days are good. The results suggest that closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) offers slightly better outcomes than open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for PLFD. Patients treated 6 weeks or more after the initial injury seem to have the worst overall outcomes than patients in the acute or delayed setting. The results suggest that patients with chronic PLD have even worse outcomes than patients with chronic PLFD. Timing of surgery is essential for an optimal outcome. When there is a delay of treatment, the outcomes are inferior to those treated acutely. Early referral to centralized treatment units for perilunate injuries would allow for targeted treatment and facilitate research on this difficult wrist injury.
月骨周围损伤并不常见,但具有挑战性,且常被漏诊,占所有腕骨创伤的7%。可识别出两种损伤类型如下:月骨周围脱位(PLD)和月骨周围骨折脱位(PLFD)。本研究的目的是进行系统评价和荟萃分析,以确定哪种手术治疗对月骨周围损伤患者更优以及延迟治疗的意义。
共筛选出2056篇文章,纳入16篇。通过美国国立卫生研究院研究质量评估工具评估病例对照系列和病例系列的偏倚风险。比较了不同时间点(急性,<7天;延迟,7 - 45天;慢性,>45天)、切开复位与闭合复位以及PLD和PLFD之间手部功能临床评分的定性结果。
总体而言,7天内接受治疗的患者临床结局评分良好。结果表明,对于PLFD,闭合复位内固定(CRIF)的效果略优于切开复位内固定(ORIF)。初始损伤后6周或更长时间接受治疗的患者总体结局似乎比急性或延迟治疗的患者更差。结果表明,慢性PLD患者的结局比慢性PLFD患者更差。
手术时机对于获得最佳结局至关重要。当存在治疗延迟时,结局不如急性治疗的患者。早期转诊至月骨周围损伤的集中治疗单位将有助于进行针对性治疗,并促进对这种棘手的腕部损伤的研究。