PRELIMINARY EVALUATION OF TREATMENT OUTCOMES OF INTERNAL FIXATION FOR CLOSED METACARPAL FRACTURES
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: The hand plays an indispensable role in daily activities; consequently, metacarpal fracture are a highly prevalent clinical entity. The primary therapeutic objectives focus on the anatomical restoration and functional preservation of the hand. Open reduction and internal fixation facilitate precise alignment and rigid stability, enabling early postoperative rehabilitation and yielding favorable clinical outcomes. Objectives: 1. Describe the clinical and radiological characteristics of patients with closed metacarpal fractures 2. Evaluate the clinical outcomes of internal fixation for closed metacarpal fractures. Materials and methods: prospective descriptive study was conducted. Results: The study evaluated 31 patients with 45 metacarpal fractures. The mean age was 36 years; fractures of the fourth metacarpal predominated, accounting for 16 cases (35.6%), while diaphyseal locations and oblique fracture patterns were most prevalent at 64.4% and 48.9%, respectively. According to the Larson–Bostman criteria, radiological outcomes were rated as excellent (90.3%), good (6.5%), and fair (3.2%). Postoperative complications were minimal, with implant loosening observed in only one patient (3.2%) and no recorded instances of infection or tendon adhesion. Functional recovery at the three-month follow-up, assessed via Belsky’s criteria, was excellent in 87.1% and good in 12.9% of cases. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that internal fixation for closed metacarpal fractures provides favorable treatment outcomes, achieving good anatomical reduction and stable fixation, thereby facilitating early mobilization and functional recovery.
Keywords
Closed metacarpal fractures, internal fixation, plate fixation, K-wire, hand’s functions
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
2. Chung K. C., Spilson S. V. The frequency and epidemiology of hand and forearm fractures in the United States. J Hand Surg Am. Sep 2001. 26(5), 908-15, doi: 10.1053/jhsu.2001.26322.
3. Walde M., Schaefer D. J., Kaempfen A. Treatment Outcome of 2nd to 5th Metacarpal Fractures: Kirschner Wires Versus Intramedullary Screws. J Clin Med. 2024. 13(24), doi:10.3390/jcm13247626.
4. Richard E. B., Christopher G. M., Theerachai A. AO Principles of Fracture Management. AO Foundation. 2017. 699-715.
5. Trần Trung Dũng. Nhận xét kết quả điều trị gãy xương bàn ngón tay bằng nẹp vít tại Bệnh viện đại học Y Hà Nội. Y học thực hành. 2013. 884(10), 8-9.
6. García-Medrano B., Honecker S., Facca S., Simón F. P., Delgado P. J., Liverneaux P. Intramedullary percutaneous fixation of metacarpal fractures: screw versus connected K-wires. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2022. 32(3), 427-436, doi:10.1007/s00590-021-02977-3
7. Đỗ Hồng Phúc, Lê Gia Ánh Thùy, Nguyễn Thị Thu Vân. Kết hợp xương bàn tay bằng nẹp ốc tại bệnh viện chấn thương chỉnh hình TP. Hồ Chí Minh. Tạp chí Y dược Thực hành 175. 2019. (19), 30-35.
8. Lưu Mạnh Hùng, Bùi Văn Nhân, Nguyễn Hải Dương. Đánh giá kết quả phẫu thuật gãy kín xương bàn ngón tay bằng nẹp vít tại Bệnh viện Đa khoa Lâm Đồng. Bản B của Tạp chí Khoa học và Công nghệ Việt Nam. 2023. 65(3ĐB), DOI: 10.31276/VJST.65(3DB).22-24.
9. Mai Đức Dũng, Vũ Duy Tân, Ngô Thị Vân Huyền, Triệu Quốc Tráng. Kết quả điều trị gãy xương bàn ngón tay bằng nẹp vít khóa tại bệnh viện Trung ương Thái Nguyên. TNU Journal of Science and Technology. 2019. 207(14), 243-248.
10. Ahmed Z., Haider M. I., Buzdar M. I., et al. Comparison of Miniplate and K-wire in the Treatment of Metacarpal and Phalangeal Fractures. Cureus. 2020. 12(2), e7039, doi: 10.7759/cureus.7039.