Refraining from closed reduction of displaced distal radius fractures in the emergency department-in short: the RECORDED trial.

BACKGROUND: With roughly 45,000 adult patients each year, distal radius fractures are one of the most common fractures in the emergency department. Approximately 60% of all these fractures are displaced and require surgery. The current guidelines advise to perform closed reduction of these fractures awaiting surgery, as it may lead to post-reduction pain relief and release tension of the surrounding neurovascular structures. Recent studies have shown that successful reduction does not warrant conservative treatment, while patients find it painful or even traumatizing. The aim of this study is to determine whether closed reduction can be safely abandoned in these patients. METHODS: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial, we will randomize between closed reduction followed by plaster casting and only plaster casting. Patients aged 18 to 75 years, presenting at the emergency department with a displaced distal radial fracture and requiring surgery according to the attending surgeon, are eligible for inclusion. Primary outcome is pain assessed with daily VAS scores from the visit to the emergency department until surgery. Secondary outcomes are function assessed by PRWHE, length of stay at the emergency department, length of surgery, return to work, patient satisfaction, and complications. A total of 134 patients will be included in this study with follow-up of 1 year. DISCUSSION: If our study shows that patients who did not receive closed reduction experience no significant drawbacks, we might be able to reorganize the initial care for distal radial fractures in the emergency department. If surgery is warranted, the patient can be sent home with a plaster cast to await the call for admission, decreasing the time spend in the emergency room drastically. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered on January 27, 2023.

Comparison of three different pelvic circumferential compression devices: a biomechanical cadaver study.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic circumferential compression devices are designed to stabilize the pelvic ring and reduce the volume of the pelvis following trauma. It is uncertain whether pelvic circumferential compression devices can be safely applied for all types of pelvic fractures because the effects of the devices on the reduction of fracture fragments are unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of circumferential compression devices on the dynamic realignment and final reduction of the pelvic fractures as a measure of the quality of reduction. METHODS: Three circumferential compression devices were evaluated: the Pelvic Binder, the SAM Sling, and the T-POD. In sixteen cadavers, four fracture types were generated according to the Tile classification system. Infrared retroreflective markers were fixed in the different fracture fragments of each pelvis. The circumferential compression device was applied sequentially in a randomized order with gradually increasing forces applied. Fracture fragment movement was studied with use of a three-dimensional infrared video system. Dynamic realignment and final reduction of the fracture fragments during closure of the circumferential compression devices were determined. A factorial repeated-measures analysis of variance with pairwise post hoc comparisons was performed to analyze the differences in pulling force between the circumferential compression devices. RESULTS: In the partially stable and unstable (Tile type-B and C) pelvic fractures, all circumferential compression devices accomplished closure of the pelvic ring and consequently reduced the pelvic volume. No adverse fracture displacement (>5 mm) was observed in these fracture types. The required pulling force to attain complete reduction at the symphysis pubis varied substantially among the three different circumferential compression devices, with a mean (and standard error of the mean) of 43 ± 7 N for the T-POD, 60 ± 9 N for the Pelvic Binder, and 112 ± 10 N for the SAM Sling. CONCLUSIONS: The Pelvic Binder, SAM Sling, and T-POD provided sufficient reduction in partially stable and unstable (Tile type-B1 and C) pelvic fractures. No undesirable overreduction was noted. The pulling force that was needed to attain complete reduction of the fracture parts varied significantly among the three devices, with the T-POD requiring the lowest pulling force for fracture reduction.