5th Metatarsal Jones Fracture - To Treat Conservatively, or Surgically Using Headless Double-Threaded Herbert Screw?

IF 0.4 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca Pub Date : 2023-01-01
J Demel, L Planka, R Stichhauer, A Vrtkova, G Bajor, M Havlicek, L Pleva
{"title":"5th Metatarsal Jones Fracture - To Treat Conservatively, or Surgically Using Headless Double-Threaded Herbert Screw?","authors":"J Demel,&nbsp;L Planka,&nbsp;R Stichhauer,&nbsp;A Vrtkova,&nbsp;G Bajor,&nbsp;M Havlicek,&nbsp;L Pleva","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Fifth metatarsal fractures, in particular so-called Jones fractures, are relatively common injuries both in the general population and athletes. Although discussions about whether the surgical or conservative solution should be preferred are ongoing for decades, there is no clear consensus. Here, we aimed to prospectively compare the results of osteosynthesis using the Herbert screw with the conservative solution in patients from our department. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients 18-50 years presenting to our department with Jones fracture and meeting further inclusion/exclusion criteria were offered participation in the study. Those willing to participate signed informed consent and were randomized by flipping the coin into surgically and conservatively treated groups. After six and twelve weeks, X-ray was performed in each patient and AOFAS score was determined. Conservatively treated patients who showed no signs of healing and whose AOFAS was below 80 after six weeks were offered surgery again. RESULTS Of 24 patients in total, 15 were assigned to the surgically treated group and nine were treated conservatively. After six weeks, AOFAS score of all but two patients (86%) in the surgically treated group ranged between 97 and 100, while this score exceeded 90 points only in three patients (33%) from the conservatively treated group. On X-ray, successful healing after six weeks was observed in seven patients (47%) from the surgically treated group but in none of the patients from the conservatively treated group. Three out of five patients in the conservative group whose AOFAS was below 80 after six weeks opted for surgery at that time and all improved significantly by the twelfth week. DISCUSSION Although studies on surgical treatment of Jones fracture using various screws or plates are not rare, we present an uncommon method of surgical treatment of this injury - the use of the Herbert screw. The results of this method are excellent and even on a relatively small sample yielded statistically significantly better results than conservative treatment. Moreover, the surgical treatment facilitated early loading of the injured limb, which allows an earlier return of the patients to normal life. CONCLUSIONS Osteosynthesis using Herbert screw in Jones fracture yielded significantly better results than conservative treatment. Key words: Jones fracture, AOFAS, Herbert screw, 5th metatarsal fracture, surgical treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":6980,"journal":{"name":"Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca","volume":"90 1","pages":"53-58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Fifth metatarsal fractures, in particular so-called Jones fractures, are relatively common injuries both in the general population and athletes. Although discussions about whether the surgical or conservative solution should be preferred are ongoing for decades, there is no clear consensus. Here, we aimed to prospectively compare the results of osteosynthesis using the Herbert screw with the conservative solution in patients from our department. MATERIAL AND METHODS Patients 18-50 years presenting to our department with Jones fracture and meeting further inclusion/exclusion criteria were offered participation in the study. Those willing to participate signed informed consent and were randomized by flipping the coin into surgically and conservatively treated groups. After six and twelve weeks, X-ray was performed in each patient and AOFAS score was determined. Conservatively treated patients who showed no signs of healing and whose AOFAS was below 80 after six weeks were offered surgery again. RESULTS Of 24 patients in total, 15 were assigned to the surgically treated group and nine were treated conservatively. After six weeks, AOFAS score of all but two patients (86%) in the surgically treated group ranged between 97 and 100, while this score exceeded 90 points only in three patients (33%) from the conservatively treated group. On X-ray, successful healing after six weeks was observed in seven patients (47%) from the surgically treated group but in none of the patients from the conservatively treated group. Three out of five patients in the conservative group whose AOFAS was below 80 after six weeks opted for surgery at that time and all improved significantly by the twelfth week. DISCUSSION Although studies on surgical treatment of Jones fracture using various screws or plates are not rare, we present an uncommon method of surgical treatment of this injury - the use of the Herbert screw. The results of this method are excellent and even on a relatively small sample yielded statistically significantly better results than conservative treatment. Moreover, the surgical treatment facilitated early loading of the injured limb, which allows an earlier return of the patients to normal life. CONCLUSIONS Osteosynthesis using Herbert screw in Jones fracture yielded significantly better results than conservative treatment. Key words: Jones fracture, AOFAS, Herbert screw, 5th metatarsal fracture, surgical treatment.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
第5跖骨琼斯骨折-保守治疗还是手术使用无头双螺纹赫伯特螺钉?
第五跖骨骨折,特别是所谓的琼斯骨折,是普通人群和运动员中相对常见的损伤。虽然关于手术治疗还是保守治疗的讨论已经持续了几十年,但并没有明确的共识。在这里,我们的目的是前瞻性地比较我们科患者使用赫伯特螺钉和保守溶液进行骨固定的结果。材料和方法18-50岁的琼斯骨折患者到我科就诊,符合进一步的纳入/排除标准。那些愿意参与的人签署了知情同意书,并通过投掷硬币随机分为手术组和保守组。6周和12周后,分别对患者行x线检查并测定AOFAS评分。保守治疗的患者在6周后无愈合迹象且AOFAS低于80,则再次进行手术。结果24例患者中,手术治疗组15例,保守治疗组9例。6周后,手术治疗组除2例(86%)患者外,其余患者的AOFAS评分均在97 - 100分之间,而保守治疗组只有3例(33%)患者的AOFAS评分超过90分。x线片显示,6周后手术治疗组有7例(47%)患者成功愈合,而保守治疗组没有一例患者成功愈合。保守组6周后AOFAS低于80的5例患者中有3例选择手术治疗,到第12周均有明显改善。尽管使用各种螺钉或钢板治疗Jones骨折的研究并不罕见,但我们提出了一种不常见的手术治疗方法-使用Herbert螺钉。这种方法的结果很好,即使在相对较小的样本上也比保守治疗产生了统计学上显著更好的结果。此外,手术治疗促进了受伤肢体的早期负荷,这使得患者能够更早地恢复正常生活。结论采用Herbert螺钉固定Jones骨折的效果明显优于保守治疗。关键词:Jones骨折,AOFAS, Herbert螺钉,第5跖骨骨折,手术治疗。
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
25.00%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Editorial Board accepts for publication articles, reports from congresses, fellowships, book reviews, reports concerning activities of orthopaedic and other relating specialised societies, reports on anniversaries of outstanding personalities in orthopaedics and announcements of congresses and symposia being prepared. Articles include original papers, case reports and current concepts reviews and recently also instructional lectures.
期刊最新文献
[Arthroscopic Subtalar Distraction Arthrodesis in Post-Traumatic Indications]. [Sagittal Profi le of the Spine in Patients after Lumbar Stabilisation Surgeries]. [Total Hip Arthroplasty Using the AMIS Method: Surgical Technique, Suitability of This Method for Obese Patients, Evaluation of the Study Population]. Management of Length Unstable Femur Fractures in Children by Flexible Intramedullary Nails: A Systematic Review. Reconstruction after Pelvic Bone Massive Resection: Evolution and Actuality of 3D-Printing Technology.
×
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