Download PDF
J Wrist Surg 2015; 04(03): 150-155
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1556855
Special Focus Section: Salvage of the Irreparable Distal Radius Fracture
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Distal Radius Isoelastic Resurfacing Prosthesis: A Preliminary Report

Satoshi Ichihara
1   Department of Hand Surgery, Strasbourg University Hospitals, FMTS, Strasbourg University, Illkirch, France
2   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Juntendo University, Tokyo, Japan
,
Juan José Hidalgo Díaz
1   Department of Hand Surgery, Strasbourg University Hospitals, FMTS, Strasbourg University, Illkirch, France
,
Brett Peterson
3   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, UC Irvine, Irvine, California
,
Sybille Facca
1   Department of Hand Surgery, Strasbourg University Hospitals, FMTS, Strasbourg University, Illkirch, France
,
Frédéric Bodin
4   Department of Plastic Surgery, Strasbourg University Hospitals, FMTS, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
,
Philippe Liverneaux
1   Department of Hand Surgery, Strasbourg University Hospitals, FMTS, Strasbourg University, Illkirch, France
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
07 August 2015 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Corrected by:

Distal Radius Isoelastic Resurfacing Prosthesis: A Preliminary ReportJ Wrist Surg 2016; 05(02): 168-168
DOI: 10.1055/s-0036-1580725

Abstract

Background Here we present a preliminary case series of unicompartmental isoelastic resurfacing prosthesis of the distal radius to treat comminuted articular fractures of osteoporotic elderly patients.

Materials and Methods Our study included 12 patients, mean age 76 years, who presented with comminuted osteoporotic distal radius fracture. Because of the severity of injury and poor bone quality; osteosynthesis was not deemed to be a good option.

Description of Technique The surgery was performed through a dorsal approach. The subchondral bone of the entire distal radial articular was excised and a unicompartmental prosthesis was applied.

Results At an average follow-up of 32 months, the pain was 2.8/10, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) 37.4/100, grip strength in neutral 49.9%, in supination 59.0%, and in pronation 56.2% of the contralateral normal side. The wrist ranges of motion in flexion and extension were 56.1% and 79.3%, in supination and pronation 87.7% and 91.0% of the contralateral normal side. Two patients experienced a complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type II; these resolved spontaneously. One patient experienced distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) stiffness, which improved after an ulna head resection. Finally, one patient required revision surgery after a secondary traumatic fracture. Radiographically; the average volar tilt was 9.8°; the average of radial inclination was 11.6°.

Conclusion The concept of a unicompartmental isoelastic resurfacing prosthesis offers a promising option for the treatment of comminuted, osteoporotic distal radius articular fractures of elderly patients.

Level of Evidence IV

Keywords

unicompartmental isoelastic resurfacing prosthesis - distal radius fracture - hemi-prosthesis - osteoporosis - elderly - wrist prosthesis
 

  • References

  • 1 Ginn TA, Ruch DS, Yang CC, Hanel DP. Use of a distraction plate for distal radial fractures with metaphyseal and diaphyseal comminution. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (Suppl 1 Pt 1): 29-36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hanel DP, Lu TS, Weil WM. Bridge plating of distal radius fractures: the Harborview method. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 445 (445) 91-99
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kwok DC, Cruess RL. A retrospective study of Moore and Thompson hemiarthroplasty. A review of 599 surgical cases and an analysis of the technical complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982; (169) 179-185
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Neer II CS, Horwitz BS. Fractures of the proximal humeral epiphysial plate. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1965; 41 (41) 24-31
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Burkhart KJ, Nijs S, Mattyasovszky SG , et al. Distal humerus hemiarthroplasty of the elbow for comminuted distal humeral fractures in the elderly patient. J Trauma 2011; 71 (3) 635-642
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Herzberg G. Prospective study of a new total wrist arthroplasty: short term results. Chir Main 2011; 30 (1) 20-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Adams BD. Total wrist arthroplasty. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg 2004; 8 (3) 130-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chantelot C. Wrist prostheses [in French]. Chir Main 2006; 25 (6) 271-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Roux JL, Micallef JP, Allieu Y. Biomechanical considerations for wrist arthroplasty. In: Simmen BR, Allieu Y, Lluch A, Stanley J, , eds. Hand arthroplasties. London, UK: Martin Dunitz; 2000: 183-191
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Roux JL. Replacement and resurfacing prosthesis of the distal radius: a new therapeutic concept [in French]. Chir Main 2009; 28 (1) 10-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Roux JL. Treatment of intra-articular fractures of the distal radius by prosthetic replacement and resurfacing [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Traumatol. 2011; 97S: S46-S53
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Vergnenègre G, Mabit C, Charissoux JL, Arnaud JP, Marcheix PS. Treatment of comminuted distal radius fractures by resurfacing prosthesis in elderly patients. Chir Main 2014; 33 (2) 112-117
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Gehrmann SV, Windolf J, Kaufmann RA. Distal radius fracture management in elderly patients: a literature review. J Hand Surg Am 2008; 33 (3) 421-429
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Schneppendahl J, Windolf J, Kaufmann RA. Distal radius fractures: current concepts. J Hand Surg Am 2012; 37 (8) 1718-1725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Butel J, Robb JE. The isoelastic hip prosthesis followed for 5 years. Acta Orthop Scand 1988; 59 (3) 258-262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Kinnard P, Vanbellinghen M, d'Affnay PL. Butel's isolestic hip prosthesis. A limited prospective study [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 1994; 80: 316-319
    PubMedGoogle Scholar