Does Proximal Row Carpectomy Improve Union in Wrist Arthrodesis? A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Autor:	Bartoletta JJ; Division of Hand Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Rioux-Forker D; Division of Hand Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Patel RS; Division of Hand Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Hinchcliff KM; Division of Hand Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Shin AY; Division of Hand Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota., Rhee PC; Division of Hand Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.; Clinical Investigation Facility, Travis Air Force Base, California.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Journal of wrist surgery [J Wrist Surg] 2021 Dec 24; Vol. 11 (4), pp. 344-352. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 Dec 24 (Print Publication: 2022).
DOI:	10.1055/s-0041-1740400
Abstrakt:	Background  Some surgeons advocate for concomitant proximal row carpectomy (PRC) with total wrist arthrodesis (TWA), though there are limited data to support or oppose this view. Questions/Purposes  Does concomitant PRC improve rates of union, revision, hardware loosening, hardware failure, and hardware removal in TWA? Patients and Methods  A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent TWA with and without concomitant PRC between January 2008 and December 2018 was undertaken. Patients were included if they underwent TWA using a dorsal spanning plate. Patients were excluded if they underwent partial wrist arthrodesis, revision TWA, or TWA with nondorsal spanning plate fixation. Results  A total of 183 wrists in 180 patients were included in the study, 96 (52.5%) in the TWA only and 87 (47.5%) in the TWA + PRC groups. Median clinical and radiographic follow-up was 18.0 months (3.0-133.0 months) in the TWA + PRC group and 18.5 months (2.0-126.0 months) in the TWA only group ( p  = 0.907). No difference in nonunion (TWA + PRC: 13/87 [14.9%], TWA only: 18/96 [18.8%], odds ratio: 0.76, p  = 0.494), revision (TWA + PRC: 5/87 [5.75%], TWA only: 8/96 [8.33%], hazard ratio [HR]: 0.73, p  = 0.586), loosening (TWA + PRC: 4/87 [4.60%], TWA only: 6/96 [6.25%], HR: 0.74, p  = 0.646), failure (TWA + PRC: 5/87 [5.75%], TWA only: 4/96 [4.17%], HR: 1.55, p  = 0.530), and removal (TWA + PRC: 12/87 [13.8%], TWA only: 16/96 [16.7%], HR: 0.84, p  = 0.634) were identified. Conclusion  Concomitant PRC might not improve rates of union or diminish complications in patient undergoing TWA. The role of PRC and the rationale for its use in TWA need to be individualized and discussed with patients prior to surgery. Level of Evidence  This is a Level IV, therapeutic study. Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None declared. (Thieme. All rights reserved.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu