Nonoperative compared with operative treatment of acute scaphoid fractures. A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, acute nondisplaced scaphoid fractures have been treated nonoperatively in a cast, and the expected union rate approaches 90%. Internal fixation of nondisplaced scaphoid fractures has increased in popularity, and a union rate of 100% has been reported. The growing trend is to recommend internal fixation for the majority of acute scaphoid fractures. The true long-term benefits of this more complicated treatment modality have not yet been determined in randomized controlled trials. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term results of operative fixation of acute scaphoid fractures with those of nonoperative treatment. METHODS: During the period between 1992 and 1997, eighty-three patients with an acute nondisplaced or minimally displaced scaphoid fracture were randomly allocated to, and received, either nonoperative treatment with a cast or internal fixation with a Herbert screw. At a median of ten years after the injury, seventy-five (93%) of the eighty-one patients who were still alive were assessed clinically and radiographically. RESULTS: All fractures united. A significant increase in the prevalence of osteoarthritis in the scaphotrapezial joint was found in the operatively treated group. No differences in subjective symptoms, as measured with limb-specific outcome scores, were found between the two groups. The range of motion and grip strength were greater, but not significantly greater, in the nonoperatively treated group. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not demonstrate a true long-term benefit of internal fixation, compared with nonoperative treatment, for acute nondisplaced or minimally displaced scaphoid fractures. The long-term risks of surgery should be considered when recommending operative treatment.

A narrow pelvic outlet increases the risk for emergency cesarean section.

BACKGROUND: The rate of cesarean section (CS) is increasing in Sweden as well as in most of the industrialized world. One of the most common indications for emergency CS is protracted labor. To what extent fetal pelvic disproportion is a cause of protracted labor is unclear. The value of pelvimetry has been questioned. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether women delivered with emergency CS because of protracted labor had a narrower pelvis than women delivered vaginally did. METHODS: Thirty women delivered with CS because of protracted labor comprised the study group. Thirty women vaginally delivered served as controls. The two groups were matched for gestational age, birth weight, and parity. The study group and the control group underwent an X-ray pelvimetry within 1 month of delivery. RESULTS: The study group and the control group did not differ in maternal age or body mass index. The mean birth weight was 3914 g in the study group and 3884 g in the control group. The mean pelvic outlet was 328 mm in the study group and 346 mm in the control group (P=0.0024). The mean pelvic inlet was 245 mm in the study group and 255 mm in the control group (P=0.0038). CONCLUSION: A narrow pelvic outlet is associated with an increased risk of emergency CS because of protracted labor. A postpartum pelvimetry is recommended and should be used when to decide on route of delivery in forthcoming pregnancies.