Detail
Článek
Článek online
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Alternative Surgical Treatment Method for 5th Metacarpal Neck Fractures: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Intramedullary and Transverse K-Wire Fixations with Additional Antirotational K-Wire [Alternativní chirurgická léčebná metoda pro zlomeninu krčku 5. metakarpu: porovnání klinických výsledků intramedulárních a příčných fixací K-drátem s dodatečným antirotačním K-drátem]

U. O. Kasman, C. Turemis, S. Surucu, Ö. Korkmaz

. 2024 ; 91 (4) : 229-233. [pub] -

Jazyk angličtina Země Česko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, srovnávací studie

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc24017544

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes and complications associated with intramedullary and transverse K-wire fixations of 5th metacarpal neck fractures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who were operated for 5th metacarpal neck fractures between 2019 and 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. Regarding the surgical treatment methods, patients were assessed by dividing them into two groups. The first group comprised patients who underwent treatment with an intramedullary K-wire. The second group comprises patients who underwent transverse K-wire fixation. RESULTS: The average quick DASH score of all patients was 5.6±4.7 in the intramedullary K-wire fixation group and 5.9±5.1 in the transverse K-wire fixation group. An average 5th finger metacarpophalangeal joint extension limitation was 6.2±5.7° in the intramedullary fixation group and 6.1±5.8° in the transverse K-wire group. The mean radiological union time was 4.9±0.7 weeks in the intramedullary fixation group and 5.1±0.7 weeks in the transverse K-wire group. No statistically significant difference was found between the quick DASH scores and degrees of the MCP joint extension limitation ( p=0.785). Intramedullary fixation and transverse K-wire fixations are effective surgical treatment methods for metacarpal neck fractures. DISCUSSION: It has been reported that the intramedullary fixation method in metacarpal bone fractures is more effective than the fixation methods with cross and transverse K-wire. But our results revealed no difference in clinical outcomes between the two surgical fixation methods. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no statistically significant difference between the two fixation techniques with regard to union, clinical outcomes, or complications. KEY WORDS: intramedullary fixation; metacarpal neck fracture; transverse K-wire fixation.

Alternativní chirurgická léčebná metoda pro zlomeninu krčku 5. metakarpu: porovnání klinických výsledků intramedulárních a příčných fixací K-drátem s dodatečným antirotačním K-drátem

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc24017544
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250402155224.0
007      
ta
008      
241004s2024 xr a f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.55095/ACHOT2024/030 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39342644
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xr
100    1_
$a Kasman, U. O. $u Bahçeşehir University Medical School, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, VM Medicalpark Pendik Hospital, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, İstanbul, Turkey
245    10
$a Alternative Surgical Treatment Method for 5th Metacarpal Neck Fractures: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Intramedullary and Transverse K-Wire Fixations with Additional Antirotational K-Wire / $c U. O. Kasman, C. Turemis, S. Surucu, Ö. Korkmaz
246    31
$a Alternativní chirurgická léčebná metoda pro zlomeninu krčku 5. metakarpu: porovnání klinických výsledků intramedulárních a příčných fixací K-drátem s dodatečným antirotačním K-drátem
520    9_
$a PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes and complications associated with intramedullary and transverse K-wire fixations of 5th metacarpal neck fractures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who were operated for 5th metacarpal neck fractures between 2019 and 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. Regarding the surgical treatment methods, patients were assessed by dividing them into two groups. The first group comprised patients who underwent treatment with an intramedullary K-wire. The second group comprises patients who underwent transverse K-wire fixation. RESULTS: The average quick DASH score of all patients was 5.6±4.7 in the intramedullary K-wire fixation group and 5.9±5.1 in the transverse K-wire fixation group. An average 5th finger metacarpophalangeal joint extension limitation was 6.2±5.7° in the intramedullary fixation group and 6.1±5.8° in the transverse K-wire group. The mean radiological union time was 4.9±0.7 weeks in the intramedullary fixation group and 5.1±0.7 weeks in the transverse K-wire group. No statistically significant difference was found between the quick DASH scores and degrees of the MCP joint extension limitation ( p=0.785). Intramedullary fixation and transverse K-wire fixations are effective surgical treatment methods for metacarpal neck fractures. DISCUSSION: It has been reported that the intramedullary fixation method in metacarpal bone fractures is more effective than the fixation methods with cross and transverse K-wire. But our results revealed no difference in clinical outcomes between the two surgical fixation methods. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no statistically significant difference between the two fixation techniques with regard to union, clinical outcomes, or complications. KEY WORDS: intramedullary fixation; metacarpal neck fracture; transverse K-wire fixation.
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    12
$a kostní dráty $7 D001864
650    12
$a metakarpální kosti $x zranění $x chirurgie $7 D050279
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    12
$a fraktury kostí $x chirurgie $7 D050723
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    12
$a intramedulární fixace fraktury $x metody $x přístrojové vybavení $7 D005594
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a vnitřní fixace fraktury $x metody $x přístrojové vybavení $7 D005593
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
700    1_
$a Turemis, C. $u Cesme Alper Cizgenakat State Hospital, Department of Orthopedics, Izmir, Turkey
700    1_
$a Surucu, S. $u Yale University, Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, New Haven, United States
700    1_
$a Korkmaz, Ö. $u Bahçeşehir University Medical School, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, VM Medicalpark Pendik Hospital, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, İstanbul, Turkey
773    0_
$w MED00011021 $t Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca $x 0001-5415 $g Roč. 91, č. 4 (2024), s. 229-233
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39342644 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b A 8 $c 507 $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20241004 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250402155220 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2294540 $s 1229494
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2024 $b 91 $c 4 $d 229-233 $e - $i 0001-5415 $m Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca $n Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech $x MED00011021
LZP    __
$b NLK124 $a Pubmed-20241004

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...