RESUMEN
Aims: The aims of this study were to describe the epidemiology of metacarpal shaft fractures (MSFs), assess variation in treatment and complications following standard care, document hospital resource use, and explore factors associated with treatment modality. Methods: A multicentre, cross-sectional retrospective study of MSFs at six centres in the UK. We collected and analyzed healthcare records, operative notes, and radiographs of adults presenting within ten days of a MSF affecting the second to fifth metacarpal between 1 August 2016 and 31 July 2017. Total emergency department (ED) attendances were used to estimate prevalence. Results: A total of 793 patients (75% male, 25% female) with 897 MSFs were included, comprising 0.1% of 837,212 ED attendances. The annual incidence of MSF was 40 per 100,000. The median age was 27 years (IQR 21 to 41); the highest incidence was in men aged 16 to 24 years. Transverse fractures were the most common. Over 80% of all fractures were treated non-surgically, with variation across centres. Overall, 12 types of non-surgical and six types of surgical treatment were used. Fracture pattern, complexity, displacement, and age determined choice of treatment. Patients who were treated surgically required more radiographs and longer radiological and outpatient follow-up, and were more likely to be referred for therapy. Complications occurred in 5% of patients (39/793). Most patients attended planned follow-up, with 20% (160/783) failing to attend at least one or more clinic appointments. Conclusion: MSFs are common hand injuries among young, working (economically active) men, but there is considerable heterogeneity in treatment, rehabilitation, and resource use. They are a burden on healthcare resources and society, thus further research is needed to optimize treatment.
RESUMEN
Background: The aim of this study is to compare the surgical and non-operative management of displaced radial head fractures via a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Methods: RCTs comparing management of isolated, displaced radial head fractures in adults were included in our review and statistical analysis. A systematic review of electronic databases (Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library) were screened for comparative RCTs reporting on the management of displaced radial head fractures in August 2021. Two investigators independently reviewed studies for eligibility and an assessment of bias was performed for each study. A Bayesian network meta-analysis of the included RCTs was performed. Results: Five RCTs (326 patients) were included in our meta-analysis. Treatment methods included radial head arthroplasty (RHA), open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with metal implants (ORIF-M), ORIF with biodegradable implants (ORIF-B) and non-operative management. In our network meta-analysis of 'good' or 'excellent' patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), RHA was significantly favourable to ORIF-M (OR: 0.04, CrI: 0.0011, 0.87), ORIF-B (OR: 0.1 CrI: 0.00076, 6.37). Nonoperative treatment was not shown to be significantly worse than RHA (OR: 0.01 CrI: 2.5e-0.5, 3.61). Conclusions: This network meta-analysis shows that in displaced radial head fractures, RHA is associated with significantly superior functional PROMs than ORIF-M based on the evidence available. Nonoperative management has not been shown to be significantly worse. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic).