Tee Richard, Onggo J R, Fine Nicola F, Tham Stephen K, Ek Eugene T
Division of Hand Surgery, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Dandenong Hospital, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Hand and Wrist Biomechanics Laboratory (HWBL), O'Brien Institute, Fitzroy, VIC, Australia.
J Wrist Surg. 2024 Jun 26;14(3):283-294. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1786027. eCollection 2025 Jun.
The purpose of this systematic review is to compare the clinical outcomes of midcarpal arthrodesis with triquetrum excision against midcarpal fusion without the excision of triquetrum performed using modern osteosynthesis technology. A systematic review of publications in PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Review was conducted. The studies that utilized osteosynthesis techniques other than Kirshner wire, with at least 10 patients, and had a minimum one-year follow-up period in English language were included. The quality of studies were evaluated using validated tools for assessing observational studies. Union rate, functional outcomes and revision/complication rates were collected and analyzed. A meta-analysis was not possible. Based on pooled data the flexion-extension arc improved by 6 degrees for midcarpal arthrodesis group with triquetrum excision, but decreased by 11 degrees in the group without. The radial-ulnar arc improved by 5 degrees in the triquetrum excision group, but decreased by 3 degrees in the triquetrum preserving group. Improvement in grip strength appears to be better in the triquetrum preserving group (10 kg as opposed to 1 kg), while there were no observable difference in pain score. The literature lacked good comparison studies to examine the role of triquetrum excision in midcarpal fusion. While midcarpal fusion with triquetrum excision appeared to yield better ROM in the pooled data, studies with direct comparison of the two techniques are required to fill in the gap. Therapeutic IV.
本系统评价的目的是比较采用现代骨固定技术进行的钩骨切除的腕中关节融合术与未切除钩骨的腕中关节融合术的临床疗效。对PubMed、Medline、EMBASE和Cochrane系统评价数据库中的出版物进行了系统评价。纳入了使用克氏针以外的骨固定技术、至少10例患者且随访期至少为1年的英文研究。使用经过验证的工具评估观察性研究的质量。收集并分析骨愈合率、功能结果以及翻修/并发症发生率。无法进行荟萃分析。根据汇总数据,钩骨切除的腕中关节融合术组的屈伸弧度改善了6度,而未切除钩骨的组则下降了11度。钩骨切除组的桡尺弧度改善了5度,而保留钩骨组下降了3度。保留钩骨组的握力改善似乎更好(10千克,而未切除钩骨组为1千克),而疼痛评分没有明显差异。文献中缺乏良好的比较研究来检验钩骨切除在腕中关节融合术中的作用。虽然在汇总数据中,切除钩骨的腕中关节融合术似乎能产生更好的关节活动度,但仍需要直接比较这两种技术的研究来填补空白。治疗性四级。