The Factors Predicting Secondary Displacement after Closed Reduction of Unstable Distal Radius Fracture

PURPOSE: It has been studied prognostic factors about secondary displacement after conservative treatment of the distal radius fracture, but each study showed different results. Authors retrospectively evaluated factors known to be involved secondary displacement of the distal radius fracture to determine its significance. METHODS: One hundred eighteen cases of the radiographically unstable distal radius fractures that closed reduction was adequately performed were retrospectively studied and the radiographic images were taken at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 weeks after closed reduction. During follow-up, dorsal tilt more than 15°, volar tilt more than 20°, ulnar positive variance more than 4 mm, radial length less than 6 mm, radial inclination less than 10° were thought of the loss of reduction. RESULTS: In 41 cases (34.7%), the loss of reduction occurred. Sex, intra-articular fracture, dorsal and volar comminution, concomitant ulnar fracture and involvement of the distal radio-ulnar joint were statistically not significant. Analysis results of the binomial logistic regression model were as follows: age (p=0.003), radial shortening (p=0.010) and ulnar positive variance (p=0.010) were statistically significant as the predictive prognostic factors. Analysis results of the multinomial logistic regression model showed age (p=0.006) as an only statistically significant factor. CONCLUSION: As the predictive prognostic factors for development of secondary displacement after conservative treatment of the unstable distal radius fracture, age was determined as most significant factor. Also radial shortening and ulnar positive variance were thought of the predictive factors for secondary displacement.

Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes of Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation: Comparison of Kirschner's Wire Transfixation and Locking Hook Plate Fixation

BACKGROUND: Kirschner's wire (K-wire) transfixation and locking hook plate fixation techniques are widely used in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes between K-wires transfixation and a locking hook plate fixation technique. METHODS: Seventy-seven patients with acute ACJ dislocation managed with K-wire (56 shoulders) and locking hook plate (21 shoulders) were enrolled for this study. The mean follow-up period was 61 months. RESULTS: At the last follow-up, the shoulder rating scale of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) was higher in patients treated with locking hook plate than with K-wires (33.2 +/- 2.7 vs. 31.3 +/- 3.4, p=0.009). In radiologic assessments, coracoclavicular distance (CCD) (7.9 mm vs. 7.7 mm, p=0.269) and acromioclavicular distance (ACD) (3.0 mm vs. 1.9 mm, p=0.082) were not statistically different from contralateral unaffected shoulder in locking hook plate fixation group, but acromioclavicular interval (ACI) was significant difference. However, there were significant differences in ACI, CCD, and ACD in K-wire fixation group (p<0.001). Eleven complications (20%) occurred in K-wire transfixation group and 2 subacromial erosions on computed tomography scan occurred in locking hook plate fixation group. CONCLUSIONS: ACJ stabilization was achieved in acute ACJ dislocations treated with K-wires or locking hook plates. Locking hook plate can provide higher UCLA shoulder score than K-wire and maintain CCD, and ACD without ligament reconstruction. K-wire transfixation technique resulted in a higher complication rate than locking hook plate.

Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes of Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation: Comparison of Kirschner's Wire Transfixation and Locking Hook Plate Fixation

BACKGROUND: Kirschner's wire (K-wire) transfixation and locking hook plate fixation techniques are widely used in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes between K-wires transfixation and a locking hook plate fixation technique. METHODS: Seventy-seven patients with acute ACJ dislocation managed with K-wire (56 shoulders) and locking hook plate (21 shoulders) were enrolled for this study. The mean follow-up period was 61 months. RESULTS: At the last follow-up, the shoulder rating scale of the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) was higher in patients treated with locking hook plate than with K-wires (33.2 +/- 2.7 vs. 31.3 +/- 3.4, p=0.009). In radiologic assessments, coracoclavicular distance (CCD) (7.9 mm vs. 7.7 mm, p=0.269) and acromioclavicular distance (ACD) (3.0 mm vs. 1.9 mm, p=0.082) were not statistically different from contralateral unaffected shoulder in locking hook plate fixation group, but acromioclavicular interval (ACI) was significant difference. However, there were significant differences in ACI, CCD, and ACD in K-wire fixation group (p<0.001). Eleven complications (20%) occurred in K-wire transfixation group and 2 subacromial erosions on computed tomography scan occurred in locking hook plate fixation group. CONCLUSIONS: ACJ stabilization was achieved in acute ACJ dislocations treated with K-wires or locking hook plates. Locking hook plate can provide higher UCLA shoulder score than K-wire and maintain CCD, and ACD without ligament reconstruction. K-wire transfixation technique resulted in a higher complication rate than locking hook plate.