Cargando…

Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: Intramedullary screw (IMS) fixation was wildly used in fifth metatarsal base fractures (FMBFs) and the results were satisfactory. However, in the comminuted osteoporosis or small displaced avulsion FMBFs, anatomical reduction and stable fixation could not be achieved with IMS. The Lockin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xie, Lin, Guo, Xin, Zhang, Shu-Jun, Fang, Zhen-Hua
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615762/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28950848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1766-z
_version_ 1783266661607931904
author Xie, Lin
Guo, Xin
Zhang, Shu-Jun
Fang, Zhen-Hua
author_facet Xie, Lin
Guo, Xin
Zhang, Shu-Jun
Fang, Zhen-Hua
author_sort Xie, Lin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Intramedullary screw (IMS) fixation was wildly used in fifth metatarsal base fractures (FMBFs) and the results were satisfactory. However, in the comminuted osteoporosis or small displaced avulsion FMBFs, anatomical reduction and stable fixation could not be achieved with IMS. The Locking Compression Plate (LCP) distal ulna hook plate fixation was a novel alternative fixation method. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine if LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation resulted in improved outcomes compared to the traditional IMS fixation in displaced avulsion FMBFs. METHODS: Of 43 patients with displaced avulsion FMBFs, 18 patients were treated with LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation and 25 were treated with IMS fixation. The patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically and followed up to 12 months. The surgery time, time for hospital stay, time for weight-bearing, time for bony union, time for return to daily life, pain relief, functional outcome and complications after treatment with LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation or IMS fixation were compared. The functional outcome was assessed by the AOFAS (American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society) mid-foot score at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after surgery. Meanwhile, pain scores were obtained at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: The two cohorts had similar baseline characteristics. Surgery time was less in LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation cohort compare to IMS fixation cohort (p < 0.0001). Time for partial weight-bearing (p < 0.0001) and full weight-bearing (p < 0.0001) also demonstrated significant improvements in patients with LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation compared to IMS fixation. Patients in the LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation cohort had significantly increased AOFAS at 9 months (p < 0.0001) and 12 months (p < 0.0001) after surgery compared to the IMS fixation cohort. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective cohort study, LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation as an alternative fixation method was better therapy for the displaced avulsion FMBFs compared to IMS fixation. LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation had a short surgery time and improved functional performance. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-017-1766-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5615762
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56157622017-09-28 Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study Xie, Lin Guo, Xin Zhang, Shu-Jun Fang, Zhen-Hua BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Intramedullary screw (IMS) fixation was wildly used in fifth metatarsal base fractures (FMBFs) and the results were satisfactory. However, in the comminuted osteoporosis or small displaced avulsion FMBFs, anatomical reduction and stable fixation could not be achieved with IMS. The Locking Compression Plate (LCP) distal ulna hook plate fixation was a novel alternative fixation method. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine if LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation resulted in improved outcomes compared to the traditional IMS fixation in displaced avulsion FMBFs. METHODS: Of 43 patients with displaced avulsion FMBFs, 18 patients were treated with LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation and 25 were treated with IMS fixation. The patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically and followed up to 12 months. The surgery time, time for hospital stay, time for weight-bearing, time for bony union, time for return to daily life, pain relief, functional outcome and complications after treatment with LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation or IMS fixation were compared. The functional outcome was assessed by the AOFAS (American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society) mid-foot score at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after surgery. Meanwhile, pain scores were obtained at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: The two cohorts had similar baseline characteristics. Surgery time was less in LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation cohort compare to IMS fixation cohort (p < 0.0001). Time for partial weight-bearing (p < 0.0001) and full weight-bearing (p < 0.0001) also demonstrated significant improvements in patients with LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation compared to IMS fixation. Patients in the LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation cohort had significantly increased AOFAS at 9 months (p < 0.0001) and 12 months (p < 0.0001) after surgery compared to the IMS fixation cohort. CONCLUSION: In this retrospective cohort study, LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation as an alternative fixation method was better therapy for the displaced avulsion FMBFs compared to IMS fixation. LCP distal ulna hook plate fixation had a short surgery time and improved functional performance. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-017-1766-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-09-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5615762/ /pubmed/28950848 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1766-z Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Xie, Lin
Guo, Xin
Zhang, Shu-Jun
Fang, Zhen-Hua
Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study
title Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study
title_full Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study
title_fullStr Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study
title_short Locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth Metatarsal Base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study
title_sort locking compression plate distal ulna hook plate fixation versus intramedullary screw fixation for displaced avulsion fifth metatarsal base fractures: a comparative retrospective cohort study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5615762/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28950848
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1766-z
work_keys_str_mv AT xielin lockingcompressionplatedistalulnahookplatefixationversusintramedullaryscrewfixationfordisplacedavulsionfifthmetatarsalbasefracturesacomparativeretrospectivecohortstudy
AT guoxin lockingcompressionplatedistalulnahookplatefixationversusintramedullaryscrewfixationfordisplacedavulsionfifthmetatarsalbasefracturesacomparativeretrospectivecohortstudy
AT zhangshujun lockingcompressionplatedistalulnahookplatefixationversusintramedullaryscrewfixationfordisplacedavulsionfifthmetatarsalbasefracturesacomparativeretrospectivecohortstudy
AT fangzhenhua lockingcompressionplatedistalulnahookplatefixationversusintramedullaryscrewfixationfordisplacedavulsionfifthmetatarsalbasefracturesacomparativeretrospectivecohortstudy