| Literature DB >> 29787613 |
Alireza Rahimnia1, Amir-Hossein Rahimnia2, Abdolkarim Mobasher-Jannat3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Scaphoid non-union is a challenging and complex problem. Various methods have been proposed for the management of patients with scaphoid non-union and to reduce the risk of complications. In this study, our aim was to evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes of using a vascularized bone graft in the treatment of scaphoid non-union.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29787613 PMCID: PMC5963744 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197768
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Risk factors leading to nonunion scaphoid fractures and nonunion complications.
| Risk factors for nonunion | Results of scaphoid malunion or non-union |
|---|---|
| Displacement of more than 1 mm | Pain |
| Fracture of the proximal pole | Altered carpal kinematics |
| History of osteonecrosis | Diminished range of motion |
| Vertical oblique fracture pattern | Disuse osteopenia |
| Nicotine use | Decreased grip strength |
| Delay in diagnosis | Dorsal intercalary segmental instability |
| Inadequate immobilization | Degenerative changes |
Clinical characteristics of patients and their association with postoperative outcomes.
| Measure, n (%) | Total (n = 41) | Non-union (n = 11) | Union (n = 30) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| >25 y | 19 (46%) | 7 (64%) | 12 (40%) | 0.30 | |
| ≤25 y | 22 (54%) | 4 (36%) | 18 (60%) | ||
| Female | 4 (10%) | 3 (27%) | 1 (3%) | 0.25 | |
| Male | 37 (90%) | 8 (73%) | 29 (97%) | ||
| Yes | 19 (46%) | 9 (82%) | 10 (33%) | 0.02 | |
| No | 22 (54%) | 2 (18%) | 20 (67%) | ||
| >22 | 18 (44%) | 6 (55%) | 12 (40%) | 0.45 | |
| ≤22 | 23 (56%) | 5 (45%) | 18 (60%) | ||
| >47 | 16 (39%) | 6 (55%) | 10 (33%) | 0.33 | |
| ≤47 | 25 (61%) | 5 (45%) | 20 (67%) | ||
| Yes | 15 (37%) | 3 (27%) | 12 (40%) | 0.80 | |
| No | 26 (63%) | 8 (73%) | 18 (60%) | ||
| Yes | 10 (24%) | 2 (18%) | 8 (27%) | 0.59 | |
| No | 31 (76%) | 9 (82%) | 22 (73%) | ||
| Yes | 26 (63%) | 6 (55%) | 20 (67%) | 0.73 | |
| No | 15 (37%) | 5 (45%) | 10 (33%) | ||
| >49 | 23 (56%) | 8 (73%) | 15 (50%) | 0.66 | |
| ≤49 | 18 (44%) | 3 (27%) | 15 (50%) | ||
Analysis of preoperative and postoperative outcomes of patients who achieved scaphoid union.
| Pre-operation | Post-operation | Contralateral | % contralateral | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Extension-flexion | 103±11 | 101±16 | 125±20 | 81% |
| Radio-ulnar abduction | 43±17 | 53±19 | 77±12 | 69% |
| DASH Score | 54±22 | 21±17 | ------------ | ------------ |
| MMWS Score | 60±16 | 83±9 | ------------ | ------------ |
| Jamar Grip Strength (kg) | ------------ | 30±10 | 41±12 | 73% |
| Key Pinch Strength (kg) | ------------ | 10±2 | 11±2 | 91% |
| Tripod Pinch Strength (kg) | ------------ | 9±4 | 9±4 | 100% |
| Scaphoid Length | 20±2 | 23±3 | ------------ | ------------ |
| Scapho-lunate angle (◦) | 56±7 | 57±5 | ------------ | ------------ |
| Nattrass Carpal Height Index | 1.55±0.12 | 1.56±0.02 | ------------ | ------------ |
*P < .05 when comparing with postoperative values.
†P < .05 when comparing with preoperative values.
Comparison of outcomes between patients who achieved union and those who did not.
| Union (n = 30) | Non-union (n = 11) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Extension-flexion | 101±16 | 95±10 | 0.2 |
| Radio-ulnar abduction | 53±19 | 33±13 | 0.03 |
| Jamar Grip Strength (kg) | 30±10 | 19±8 | 0.04 |
| Key Pinch Strength (kg) | 10±2 | 9±3 | 0.4 |
| Tripod Pinch Strength (kg) | 9±4 | 9±1 | 0.6 |