Choosing the optimum method of treatment for extra-articular distal radius Colles' type fractures in adult: A retrospective cohort study

S. Majhi, Aayushee Gupta, Sabyasachi Das, R. Maharaj, D. Nanda, Laxman Hansdah
{"title":"Choosing the optimum method of treatment for extra-articular distal radius Colles' type fractures in adult: A retrospective cohort study","authors":"S. Majhi, Aayushee Gupta, Sabyasachi Das, R. Maharaj, D. Nanda, Laxman Hansdah","doi":"10.4103/jodp.jodp_33_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Context: Distal radius fractures are often encountered in orthopedic outpatient department, mostly managed with a below-elbow cast though malunion is the commonest known complication. Many researches had already been conducted comparing cast with various surgical methods; however, conclusive results yet to be ascertained. While choosing the treatment, we retrospectively analyzed the results of different methods to reach a conclusion. Subjects and Methods: A total of 92 patients with unilateral extra-articular or partially articular distal radius fracture were analyzed retrospectively over a period of 2 years, 30 of which managed conservatively and 62 with various surgical techniques (plate 27, external fixation 24, and K-wires 11). Functional results were recorded by PRWE score and radiological union was assessed. Statistical Analysis Used: Unpaired t-test was used for numerical value and Chi-square test for categorical values, and analysis of variance was used for multiple comparisons among the groups. Results: PRWE pain score, PRWE functional score, and means of individual radiological parameters measurements did not show any significant association among the study groups, P > 0.05. However, Chi-square test of association showed a significant correlation between radiology and function, P < 0.001. Conclusions: There is no difference between surgical and nonsurgical methods as a whole so as to say which one is better, thus nonsurgical methods still hold a good option today and should be the first choice while dealing with such injuries. Anatomical reduction should always be tried irrespective of methods of treatment as excellent to good function was seen with undisplaced or minimally displaced or well-reduced fractures.","PeriodicalId":34809,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Diseases and Traumatology","volume":"5 1","pages":"24 - 30"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Diseases and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jodp.jodp_33_21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Context: Distal radius fractures are often encountered in orthopedic outpatient department, mostly managed with a below-elbow cast though malunion is the commonest known complication. Many researches had already been conducted comparing cast with various surgical methods; however, conclusive results yet to be ascertained. While choosing the treatment, we retrospectively analyzed the results of different methods to reach a conclusion. Subjects and Methods: A total of 92 patients with unilateral extra-articular or partially articular distal radius fracture were analyzed retrospectively over a period of 2 years, 30 of which managed conservatively and 62 with various surgical techniques (plate 27, external fixation 24, and K-wires 11). Functional results were recorded by PRWE score and radiological union was assessed. Statistical Analysis Used: Unpaired t-test was used for numerical value and Chi-square test for categorical values, and analysis of variance was used for multiple comparisons among the groups. Results: PRWE pain score, PRWE functional score, and means of individual radiological parameters measurements did not show any significant association among the study groups, P > 0.05. However, Chi-square test of association showed a significant correlation between radiology and function, P < 0.001. Conclusions: There is no difference between surgical and nonsurgical methods as a whole so as to say which one is better, thus nonsurgical methods still hold a good option today and should be the first choice while dealing with such injuries. Anatomical reduction should always be tried irrespective of methods of treatment as excellent to good function was seen with undisplaced or minimally displaced or well-reduced fractures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
选择成人桡骨远端关节外Colles型骨折的最佳治疗方法:一项回顾性队列研究
背景:桡骨远端骨折常见于骨科门诊,大多采用肘下石膏治疗,尽管畸形愈合是最常见的并发症。许多研究已经对石膏与各种手术方法进行了比较;然而,结论性的结果尚未确定。在选择治疗方法时,我们回顾性分析不同治疗方法的结果,得出结论。对象和方法:回顾性分析了2年来92例单侧关节外或部分关节外桡骨远端骨折患者,其中30例采用保守治疗,62例采用各种手术技术(钢板27例,外固定架24例,k -钢丝11例)。通过PRWE评分记录功能结果并评估放射学愈合。使用统计分析:数值采用非配对t检验,分类值采用卡方检验,组间多组比较采用方差分析。结果:PRWE疼痛评分、PRWE功能评分和个体放射学参数测量方法在研究组之间无显著相关性,P < 0.05。然而,卡方关联检验显示放射学与功能之间存在显著相关性,P < 0.001。结论:手术与非手术方法在整体上并无优劣之分,非手术方法在治疗此类损伤时仍不失为一个较好的选择,应作为首选。无论采用何种治疗方法,解剖复位都应尝试,因为未移位或轻度移位或复位良好的骨折均具有良好的功能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Conservative Treatment of Upper Limb Diaphyseal and Metaphyseal Fractures (Humerus, Radius, and Ulna) with Extension Casting Outcome of Open Reduction and Internal Fixation versus Hemiarthroplasty in Proximal Humerus Complex Fractures Percutaneous transpedicular vertebroplasty using calcium phosphate cement for osteoporotic vertebral fractures: A prospective study of functional outcomes A prospective and retrospective study of the outcome of high tibial osteotomy in osteoarthritis of the knee with varus deformity Randomized clinical trial to assess functional outcome and complication of surgical neck humerus fracture (two part and three part) treated by percutaneous K-wire fixation and Philos plating
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1