Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE

Dorsal Distraction Plating for Highly Comminuted

Evidence-Based Medicine
Distal Radius Fractures
Daniel J. Lee, BA, John C. Elfar, MD

THE PATIENT THE EVIDENCE


A 60-year-old woman fell from a standing height, Ring et al3 reviewed 25 fractures of the distal radius
fractured her left distal radius, an orthosis was fabri- with complex articular and metaphyseal fragmenta-
cated at an emergency department without reduction, tion (AO C3.2) treated with combined dorsal and
and she presented to the office 6 days after injury. volar plate fixation. At final follow up, wrist flexion
Radiographs revealed a comminuted intra-articular and extension averaged 51 and 54 , respectively,
distal radius fracture (DRF) with metaphyseal commi- and forearm pronation and supination averaged 79
nution and a complex articular fracture with both cor- and 74 , respectively. Subsequent plate removal was
onal and sagittal fracture lines (AO Subtype C3.2). performed in 21 patients and surgery for ruptured
tendon in 2 patients.
THE QUESTION Benson et al4 reviewed 81 patients with 85 intra-
When is dorsal distraction plating a good option for a articular DRFs managed with a fragment-specific
DRF? approach (a separate implant on each fracture frag-
ment). These included 8 B2, 1 B3, 31 C1, 27 C2, and
CURRENT OPINION 18 C3 fractures. An average of 32 months after
fracture, they reported an average wrist flexion and
Fractures with fragmentation of both the articular
extension of 60 and 69 , respectively.
surface and the metaphysis (AO C3.2) are difficult to
Distraction plating for comminuted and displaced
stably realign, particularly if there is extension into
fractures of the distal radius was first described in a
the diaphysis (AO C3.3). A variety of operative
case report by Burke and Singer in 1998.5 They re-
techniques are used for complex articular fractures.
ported acceptable reduction of comminuted intra-
Dorsal distraction plating, often referred to as bridge
articular fractures using a 3.5-mm plate through the
plating and commonly used in patients with multiple
fourth dorsal compartment and affixed to the long
injuries, has emerged as a promising treatment option
finger metacarpal.
for AO C3.2 and AO C3.3 fractures. The dorsal
In the same year, Becton et al6 presented an alter-
distraction plate provides both internal distraction
native approach utilizing antegrade placement though
and buttress support of the dorsal part of the fracture,
the second dorsal compartment onto the index meta-
and may allow greater patient participation in trans-
carpal in 35 patients (35 wrists) with comminuted extra-
fers and other activities in the early postoperative
articular fractures of the distal radius. They reported
period.1,2 Unlike external fixation, the bridge plate
fracture union at 8 weeks with only two complications,
can be left in place for an extended period of time
one involving plate breakage at the index metacarpal
without the risk of pin loosening or infection.
and the other with fracture of the index metacarpal
through a screw hole. Both patients healed uneventfully
From the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center,
Rochester, NY. and had uncomplicated hardware removal.
Received for publication September 29, 2014; accepted in revised form October 4, 2014.
In 2005, Ruch et al1 reviewed 22 high-energy
DRFs with metaphyseal comminution and diaphy-
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received related directly or
indirectly to the subject of this article. seal extension (2 A3.3 and 20 C3.3 fractures) treated
Corresponding author: John C. Elfar, MD, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University with open reduction and internal fixation with a
of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Avenue, Box 665, Rochester, NY 14642; 3.5-mm plate applied retrograde through the fourth
e-mail: openelfar@gmail.com. dorsal compartment with fixation to the long finger
0363-5023/15/4002-0028$36.00/0 metacarpal. The authors reported good or excellent
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2014.10.005
results in 20 of 22 patients with only one case of

Ó 2015 ASSH r Published by Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved. r 355


356 DISTRACTION PLATING FOR DISTAL RADIUS FRACTURES

radiographic articular incongruity (step-off > 2 mm) Mithani et al9 described dorsal distraction plating
after plate removal. The average duration between for 8 distal radius nonunions in 8 patients treated
Evidence-Based Medicine

placement and removal of the plate was 6 months. initially with various other forms of fixation. They
Despite prolonged immobilization across the wrist reported 100% union and significant gains in ROM
joint, the final range of motion (ROM) of the wrist and subjective outcomes based on Disabilities of
averaged 35 flexion and 45 extension an average of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores. Although not
6 months after plate removal. Three patients had a directly relevant to the management of acute fractures,
long finger extensor lag but there were no reported these data highlight the versatility of a technique that
extensor tendon ruptures. can help manage complications of other treatments.
Hanel et al2 described 62 highly comminuted
metadiaphyseal DRFs treated with dorsal distraction SHORTCOMINGS OF THE EVIDENCE
plating using a 2.4-mm plate placed antegrade using
The evidence regarding the use of dorsal distraction
the second dorsal compartment and index finger
plates for highly comminuted DRFs is limited to
metacarpal. Multiple traumatic injuries were present
retrospective case series. There are no data comparing
in 23 of the 62 patients (37%). There were 18 AO
distraction plating with external fixation or plate
A3.3 fractures, 3 AO B2.3, and 41 AO C3.3 frac-
fixation. Given the interobserver variability in clas-
tures. There were no articular gaps greater than 2 mm
sification of distal radius fractures, it is difficult to
and the average radial inclination was greater than 5
compare the results from different series. The tech-
in all patients with neutral palmar tilt on average.
nique varies somewhat between series with some
Although there were no reported values for average
authors2 passing the plate through the second dorsal
ROM, the authors reported “functional range of
compartment and fixing the plate to the index meta-
motion” within a year of plate removal in their
carpal and others1 passing the plate through the
cohort. It is notable that follow-up only included 52
fourth dorsal compartment and fixing it to the long
of 60 patients and was not uniform. One patient had a
finger metacarpal, with both approaches used either
broken plate and extensor tendon rupture when he did
antegrade or retrograde. The plates vary as well from
not return for planned plate removal.
long generic 2.4-mm or 3.5-mm plates to plates
In a follow-up study, Hanel et al7 studied 140 pa-
designed specifically for use in the distal radius.
tients with 144 fractures treated with either a 2.4-mm
There are advocates of dorsal distraction plating
or 2.7-mm plate placed retrograde through either the
for more straightforward fractures in multiply injured
second or fourth dorsal compartment and affixed to
patients—described by Hanel et al2 as those with
either the index or long finger metacarpal. They re-
concomitant injuries that benefit from weight-bearing
ported minor and major complication rates of 4.6%
across the injured wrist to sit up, transfer, and walk—
and 8.5%, respectively. Three cases of plate breakage
but no data regarding advantages and disadvantages
occurred with a 2.7-mm implant as well as two cases
compared with other methods of fixation.
of screw failure with 2.4-mm screws; the authors
recommended use of a larger 3.5-mm plate and
2.7-mm screws to avoid implant failure. DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Richard et al8 studied 33 patients (33 wrists) treated Prospective randomized controlled trials comparing
with either a 2.4-mm or 3.5-mm plate placed either dorsal distraction plating with external fixation and
antegrade or retrograde through the fourth dorsal volar plating for fractures of the distal radius with both
compartment; in 12 patients, the plate was fixed to the articular and metaphyseal/diaphyseal fragmentation
index finger metacarpal and in 21 patients it was (AO C3.2 or 3.3) would help determine the advan-
secured to the long finger metacarpal. They reported tages and disadvantages of each technique. Parameters
an average palmar tilt of 5 and radial inclination of of interest include radiographic alignment, wrist,
20 at the time of final follow-up (average 47 weeks). forearm, and digit motion, symptoms and disability,
A congruent distal articular surface (step-off < 2 mm) and adverse events. These fractures are uncommon
was maintained in 30 of 33 wrists, and ROM an and any trial would have to include multiple centers.
average of 1 year after plate removal included average The role of distraction plating for more straightfor-
flexion and extension values of 46 and 50 , respec- ward fractures in multiply injured patients would also
tively, and average pronation and supination values of need to be compared prospectively to other methods
79 and 77 , respectively. They documented finger of fixation in studies involving multiple centers.
stiffness in 10 of 33 wrists with one patient requiring It would also be useful to compare various methods
extensor tenolysis. of bridge plate fixation utilizing different plate sizes

J Hand Surg Am. r Vol. 40, February 2015


DISTRACTION PLATING FOR DISTAL RADIUS FRACTURES 357

and compartment placements. These studies would REFERENCES


also have to be prospective and randomized to be 1. Ruch DS, Ginn TA, Yang CC, Smith BP, Rushing J, Hanel DP. Use of

Evidence-Based Medicine
certain that the cohorts were comparable. a distraction plate for distal radial fractures with metaphyseal and
diaphyseal comminution. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(5):945e954.
2. Hanel DP, Lu TS, Weil WM. Bridge plating of distal radius fractures:
OUR CURRENT CONCEPTS FOR THIS PATIENT the Harborview method. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;445:91e99.
We prefer dorsal distraction plating for AO C3.2 and 3. Ring D, Prommersberger K, Jupiter JB. Combined dorsal and volar
plate fixation of complex fractures of the distal part of the radius.
C3.3 fractures in which complex articular and extra- J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(8):1646e1652.
articular fragmentation with fragments that are 4. Benson LS, Minihane KP, Stern LD, Eller E, Seshadri R. The outcome
small enough would be poorly fixed or supported of intra-articular distal radius fractures treated with fragment-specific
fixation. J Hand Surg Am. 2006;31(8):1333e1339.
with screws if a locking volar plate was used alone.
5. Burke EF, Singer RM. Treatment of comminuted distal radius with the
As noted by Ruch et al1 and Hanel et al2, the use of an internal distraction plate. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg.
distraction plate allows for prolonged immobilization 1998;2(4):248e252.
across the wrist joint without compromising func- 6. Becton JL, Colborn GL, Goodrich JA. Use of an internal fixator device
to treat comminuted fractures of the distal radius: report of a technique.
tional outcomes and circumvents the risk of pin Am J Orthop. 1998;27(9):619e623.
loosening and pin infection associated with external 7. Hanel DP, Ruhlman SD, Katolik LI, Allan CH. Complications asso-
fixation. Furthermore, the distraction plate may allow ciated with distraction plate fixation of wrist fractures. Hand Clin.
2010;26(2):237e243.
for earlier weight bearing across the affected wrist in 8. Richard MJ, Katolik LI, Hanel DP, Wartinbee DA, Ruch DS.
the multiply injured patient. Our preferred method of Distraction plating for the treatment of highly comminuted distal
placement is retrograde (distal to proximal) through radius fractures in elderly patients. J Hand Surg Am. 2012;37(5):
the second compartment with fixation of the plate to 948e956.
9. Mithani SK, Srinivasan RC, Kamal R, Richard MJ, Leversedge FJ,
the index finger metacarpal. The implant is left in Ruch DS. Salvage of distal radius nonunion with a dorsal spanning
place for about 3 months. distraction plate. J Hand Surg Am. 2014;39(5):981e994.

J Hand Surg Am. r Vol. 40, February 2015