BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the best surgical treatment in Kienböck disease. We compared the short-term outcomes of radial shortening osteotomy and capitate shortening osteotomy in patients affected with this disease. METHODS: In a retrospective study of 21 patients with Lichtman stage IIIA of Kienböck disease, 12 patients with an average follow up of 3.2 ± 0.6 years had radial shortening osteotomy (group I) and 9 patients with an average follow up of 3.1 ± 0.7 years had capitate shortening osteotomy (group II). The two groups were comparable in age, sex, operated side, initial Lichtman stage, and follow-up duration. At the last follow-up the patients were evaluated for pain, wrist range of motion, grip strength, wrist functional status and change in their Lichtman stage. The overall results were evaluated by the Cooney wrist function score and DASH score. RESULTS: All the patients in the two groups had improvement of their wrist pains. According to the Cooney wrist function score group I had 1 excellent, 9 good, and 2 fair scores and group II had 1 excellent, 6 good, and 2 fair scores. Comparisons between the means of pain VAS scores, wrist range of movement, grip strength, DASH score, and Cooney wrist function score in the two groups were not significant. Also, the changes of the Lichtman stage in the two groups were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Both groups had reasonable short-term outcomes. We were unable to recognize a substantial clinical difference between the two surgical treatments in short-term outcomes.
BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the best surgical treatment in Kienböck disease. We compared the short-term outcomes of radial shortening osteotomy and capitate shortening osteotomy in patients affected with this disease. METHODS: In a retrospective study of 21 patients with Lichtman stage IIIA of Kienböck disease, 12 patients with an average follow up of 3.2 ± 0.6 years had radial shortening osteotomy (group I) and 9 patients with an average follow up of 3.1 ± 0.7 years had capitate shortening osteotomy (group II). The two groups were comparable in age, sex, operated side, initial Lichtman stage, and follow-up duration. At the last follow-up the patients were evaluated for pain, wrist range of motion, grip strength, wrist functional status and change in their Lichtman stage. The overall results were evaluated by the Cooney wrist function score and DASH score. RESULTS: All the patients in the two groups had improvement of their wrist pains. According to the Cooney wrist function score group I had 1 excellent, 9 good, and 2 fair scores and group II had 1 excellent, 6 good, and 2 fair scores. Comparisons between the means of pain VAS scores, wrist range of movement, grip strength, DASH score, and Cooney wrist function score in the two groups were not significant. Also, the changes of the Lichtman stage in the two groups were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Both groups had reasonable short-term outcomes. We were unable to recognize a substantial clinical difference between the two surgical treatments in short-term outcomes.