Efficacy of non‐bridging external fixation in treating distal radius fractures

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the efficacy of non‐bridging external fixation in treating distal radius fractures (DRF) and its effect on wrist joint function. METHODS: The medical records of 207 patients who were treated for DRF between May 2008 and April 2017 in our hospital (age, 18.0–70.0 years; 99 males and 108 females) were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had evident wrist trauma and the diagnosis of DRF was confirmed by imaging tests. A total of 101 patients received bridging external fixation (control group), whereas another 106 received non‐bridging external fixation (study group). At 12 weeks after the procedure, the treatment effect was measured using the Dienst scoring system (rating scale: ≤3 points, excellent; 4–7 points, good; 8–11 points, fair; >12 points, poor), and the wrist joint function was evaluated by Gartland and Werley classification (rating scale: 0–2 points, excellent; 3–8 points, good; 9–20 points, fair; >21 points, poor); meanwhile, the radial length, radial inclination, and palmar tilt were examined by X‐ray. Follow‐up visits were conducted once every 2 weeks for 6 months, and the incidences of complications in the two groups within 6 months after operation were recorded, including incision infection, Kirschner wire loosening, delayed fracture healing, and arthritis. RESULTS: There were no differences in the sex ratio, mean age, mean injury period, Arbeitsgemeinschaft fur osteosynthesefragen classification, and cause of fracture between the two groups (all P > 0.05). In terms of the treatment effects, the study group had a higher percentage of excellent results (P < 0.001) and lower percentages of fair and poor results (P = 0.002, P = 0.001) than the control group 12 weeks after treatment, while both groups had similar percentages of good results (P = 0.109). In terms of the score of the wrist joint function, the study group had a higher proportion of excellent result than the control group 12 weeks after treatment (P = 0.029), whereas no intergroup differences in the proportion of good, fair, and poor results were observed (all P > 0.05). After follow‐up for 6 months, the incidences of incision infection, Kirschner wire loosening, delayed fracture healing, and arthritis, as well as the total complication rate were found to be similar between the two groups (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Using non‐bridging external fixation for treating DRF allows some level of wrist movement during the early stage of fixation, effectively maintains the radial length, radial inclination, and palmar tilt, and achieves better outcomes than bridging external fixation.