Summary
Evidence from four randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials suggests that
treatment of acute distal radius fractures with wrist bridging external fixation compared
with nonbridging external fixation leads to comparable results with respect to DASH
functional scores, grip strength, extension, and VAS pain scores. There was conflicting
evidence in regard to which method may provide the best final degree of flexion and
length of ulnar variance. The total number of reported complications was greater for
nonbridging fixation in three of the four trials; similarly, the percentage of patients
with pin track infection was consistently higher in the nonbridging fixation groups.
However, these differences were not statistically significant. Additional methodologically
rigorous comparative studies with larger populations may help establish the long term
safety and efficacy of these two treatments and establish the superiority of one treatment
over another.
