Home About Us Contact Us

 

Table of Content - Volume 19 Issue 3 - September 2021


 

Functional outcome of diaphyseal fractures of both bones of forearm in adults after fixation with dynamic compression plate at a tertiary care center

 

Namdev June1, Deepak Lamture2, Tauseef Ahmad Qamruddin Ansari3*

 

1Associate Professor 2Professor & HOD, 3Junoir Resident, Department of Orthopaedic, Swami Ramanand Teerth Rural Government Medical College, Ambajogai, Beed, Maharashtra, INDIA.

Email: tauseefahmadansari09@gmail.com

 

Abstract              Background: Treatment of diaphyseal forearm fractures in adults is generally based on open osteosynthesis with plates and screws on each of the forearm bones. Nonunion of the fracture seems to be the most frequent complication of these fractures. In present study we aimed to analysed functional outcome of diaphyseal fractures of both bones of forearm in adults after fixation with dynamic compression plate at a tertiary care center. Material and Methods: Present study was retrospective, case record based study, conducted in patients with acute diaphyseal fractures of forearm treated with dynamic compression plate or intramedullary nailing who were 18–60 years of age and type 1, type 2 compound fractures. Results: 30 cases satisfying study criteria were considered for study. The age of these patients ranged from 18-60 years, had mean age of 35.03 ± 9.82 years. Male to female ratio was 1.5:1. with fracture being most common in 3rddecade and an average age of 31 years. In present study right sided injuries (60%) were common, common mode of injury was RTA (66.67%). Majority of the fractures were seen in the middle 1/3rd (46.67 %), were simple fractures (53.33 %) and closed (86.67 %). Majority of fractures were healed in less than 4 months (73.33 %), followed by 4-6 months (20 %). Mean time required for fracture union was 17.32 ± 3.77 weeks. No intraoperative complications were noted. Postoperative complications such as Superficial Infections (3.3 %) and radioulnar synostosis (3.3 %) were noted in one patient each. Using the Anderson scoring system, at 6 months follow-up, 83.33 % patients had excellent results, 13.33% patients had satisfactory results and 1 (3.3%) patients had unsatisfactory result (radioulnar synostosis). Conclusion: Open reduction and internal fixation with dynamic compression plate had excellent functional outcome in the majority of patients, maintain rotational stability and length and early mobilization of elbow and wrist joint and had minimum complications.

Keywords: diaphyseal fractures, Radius, Ulna, Dynamic compression plate, forearm

 

INTRODUCTION

The forearm, in combination with the proximal and distal radioulnar joints, allows pronation and supination which in turn helps hand, to perform multi axial movements. Fracture both bones of forearm presents a formidable challenge to the orthopaedicians, as the various muscle forces acting upon the fracture tend to displace it. Hence to provide the functional rehabilitation of the upper limb, anatomic reduction and rigid fixation is mandatory The incidence of diaphyseal fractures of the radius, ulna or both is reported to be approximately 1 to 10 per 10,000 persons per year, although rates may vary according to age and sex. In this era of active life, rapid industrialisation, increasing road traffic accidents, competitive sports; the incidence of fractures of forearm bones are increasing in frequency.2 Treatment of diaphyseal forearm fractures in adults is generally based on open osteosynthesis with plates and screws on each of the forearm bones. Nonunion of the fracture seems to be the most frequent complication of these fractures.3,4 The plates most widely used for the internal fixation of the forearm fractures are 3.5 mm locking compression plate (LCP), dynamic compression plate, and limited contact dynamic compression plate. In present study we aimed to analysed functional outcome of diaphyseal fractures of both bones of forearm in adults after fixation with dynamic compression plate at a tertiary care center.

 

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Present study was retrospective, case record based study, conducted in Department of Orthopaedic, Swami Ramanand Teerth Rural Government Medical College, Ambajogai, India. Cases operated between January 2016 to December 2020, for management of diaphyseal forearm fractures treated by open reduction and internal fixation with dynamic compression plate were considered for this study. Study approval was taken from institutional ethical committee. Acute diaphyseal fractures of forearm treated with dynamic compression plate or intramedullary nailing who were 18–60 years of age and type 1, type 2 compound fractures were included in study and people with pathological fracture, associated neurovascular injury, crush injuries and multiple fractures with head injuries were excluded. Patient details such as demographic details, clinical history, mode of injury, relevant past medical history, clinical examination findings, X-ray reports, laboratory investigations were noted from patient records. Surgery details, hospital course, post-operative details were noted from records. The functional outcome was assessed according to Anderson scoring system which included evaluation of the movements and radiological union done during follow-up were noted. Data was collected and compiled using Microsoft Excel and statistical analysis was done using descriptive statistics.

 

RESULTS

30 cases satisfying study criteria were considered for study. The age of these patients ranged from 18-60 years, had mean age of 35.03 ± 9.82 years. Male to female ratio was 1.5:1. with fracture being most common in 3rddecade and an average age of 31 years. In present study right sided injuries (60%) were common, common mode of injury was RTA (66.67%). Majority of the fractures were seen in the middle 1/3rd (46.67 %), were simple fractures (53.33 %) and closed (86.67 %).


 

Table 1: General characteristics of study participants.

Variable

No. of Patient’s (n=30)

Percentage

Mean Age(yrs)

35.03 ± 9.82

Gender (Male: female)

22/08

73.33/26.67

Fracture side (right: left)

18/12

60/40

Mode of injury

Road traffic accident

20

66.67

Fall from height

4

13.33

Slip and fall down

3

10.00

Assault

3

10.00

Fracture site

Proximal 1/3rd

7

23.33

Middle 1/3rd

14

46.67

Distal 1/3rd

9

30.00

Type of fracture

Simple

16

53.33

Comminuted

11

36.67

Segmental

2

6.67

Closed fractures

26

86.67

Open fractures

4

13.33

Majority of fractures were healed in less than 4 months (73.33 %), followed by 4-6 months (20 %). Mean time required for fracture union was 17.32 ± 3.77 weeks.

Table 2: Duration of fracture union

Time of union

No. of cases

Percentage

< 4 months (16 weeks)

22

73.33

4-6 months (16 – 24 weeks)

6

20.00

6 months - 1 year (24-36 weeks)

2

6.67

Mean time

17.32 ± 3.77 weeks

In present study, no intraoperative complications were noted. Postoperative complications such as Superficial Infections (3.3 %) and radioulnar synostosis (3.3 %) were noted in one patient each.

 

Table 3: Complications

Complications

No. of cases

Percentage

Superficial infection

1

3.3

Radioulnar stenosis

1

3.3

Using the Anderson scoring system, at 6 months follow-up, 83.33 % patients had excellent results, 13.33% patients had satisfactory results and 1 (3.3%) patients had unsatisfactory result (radioulnar synostosis).

 

Table 4: Functional outcome

Results

Union

Flexion / Extension at elbow joint

Supination and pronation

No. of cases

Percentage

Excellent

Present

<100 loss

<25% loss

25

83.33

Satisfactory

Present

<200 loss

<50% loss

4

13.33

Unsatisfactory

Present

>200 loss

>50% loss

1

3.33

Failure

Non union with / without loss of motion

0

0

 


DISCUSSION

Fracture of the forearm both bones may result in severe loss of function unless adequately treated. Anatomical reduction of the fracture fragments, stable internal fixation, preservation of blood supply to the bone fragment, early active pain free mobilization of the adjacent muscles and joints are the principle for fixation of both bone fracture in adults.5 Open reduction and internal fixation with plate gives good reduction and rigid fixation, and also radial bow can be maintained, primary bone healing is achieved. When fracture gap is compressed by dynamic compression plate, capillaries grow in medullary callus and union rates are high.6,7 The disadvantages are the risks of any open surgical fixation, that is increase in chance of infection, disturbance of the soft tissues, periosteal stripping, and evacuation of fracture hematoma.8 With conventional plating, the screw acts as an anchor, with its axial force press the plate against bone, which produces large frictional force at the bone plate interface and this force has been shown to cause vascular disturbance, especially in the periosteum. The term limited contact dynamic compression plate(LC-DCP) stands for a new approach to plate fixation, reduced trauma to the bone , preservation of blood supply, avoidance of stress raisers produced at implant removal and improved healing.9 In a comparative study by Venkataraman S et al.,10 average union time in DCP group is 23.39 weeks and square nail group is 28.89 weeks. Union in DCP group was 27 (90%) and square nail group 22 (73.33%). Delayed union in DCP group was 03 (10%) and in Square nail group was 6 (20%), non-union in DCP group was 0 (nil) and in square nail group was 2 (06%). Open reduction and internal fixation with DCP plates for both bone diaphyseal forearm fractures gives good results with early union rates. Similar findings were noted in preset study. Girish Sahni et al.,11 studied 50 cases of fracture forearm bones treated by 3.5 mm dynamic compression platting, after follow up period of 6 to 10 months, 80% were graded excellent, 18% good and 2% as failure. Similar findings were noted in present study. External support was not used. ORIF with DCP still has a prospect in repair of forearm factures considering its low complication rate, cost and acceptable results in developing country like India where financial matter and non availability of C-arm image intensifier are to be considered. Kamlesh Jaswani12 studied 30 cases of fracture BBFA treated by open reduced and internally fixed with 3.5 mm LCDCP. Age distribution ranged from 15- 55 years with fracture being most common in 3rd and 4th decade (Average 31).Side affected 20 (66.66%) right side and 10 patients (33.33%) left side. By Andersons scoring system, 25 (83.33%) patients with excellent results, 4 (13.33%) patients with satisfactory results and 1 (3.3%) with unsatisfactory result (radioulnar synostosis). Superficial infection 2 (6.66%) posterior interosseous nerve injury 3 (10%) and Radioulnarsynostosis 1 (3.3%) were complications. Meeravali SK13, studied retrospective data of 56 patients with fractures of both the radius and ulna underwent repair by dynamic compression plate with screw fixation. were studied, Patient regained full range of movements within : 6-8 weeks. At 12-14weeks check X ray showed good radiological union. In this series out of 56 cases 42 (75%) cases are graded excellent, 7 (12.5%) cases are graded good, fair 5 (9%) cases and poor 2 (3.5%) cases. better results were noted in present study. It is essential to regain length, apposition, axial alignment and normal rotational alignment while treating diaphyseal fractures of the radius and the ulna to gain good range of pronation and supination can be achieved by open reduction and internal fixation with dynamic compression plate.

               Limitations of present study were retrospective nature, small sample size.

CONCLUSION

Open reduction and internal fixation with dynamic compression plate had excellent functional outcome in the majority of patients, maintain rotational stability and length and early mobilization of elbow and wrist joint and had minimum complications.

 

REFERENCES

  1. Snell, Richard S. 2012. The Upper Limb. Chapter-9 in Clinical anatomy for medical students, Philadelphia; Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 448.
  2. KB Ravi, TS Raghavendra, S Balasubramanian, Forearm Bone fractures: Dynamic Compression Platting Vs Locking compression plating – Randomised control study. Indian Journal of Basic and Applied Medical Research; June 2014: Vol.-3, Issue- 3, P. 226-232.
  3. Fernandez Dell’Oca AA, Tepic S, Frigg R, Meisser A, Haas N, Perren SM. Treatingforearm fractures using an internal fixator: a prospective study. Clin OrthopRelat Res 2001;389:196–205.
  4. Langkamer VG, Ackroyd CE. Internal fixation of forearm fractures in the 1980s:lessons to be learnt. Injury 1991;22(2):97–102.
  5. Goldfarb CA, Ricci WM, Tull F, Ray D, Borrelli J, Jr. Functional outcome after fracture of both bones of the forearm. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(3):374-9.
  6. Dodge HS, Cady GW. Treatment of fractures of the radius and ulna with compression plates: A retrospective study of one hundred and nineteen fractures in seventy eight patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1972;54:1167-76.
  7. Ross ER, Gourevitch D, Hastings GW, Wynn-Jones CE, Ali S. Retrospective analysis of plate fixation of diaphyseal fractures of the forearm bones. Injury. 1989;20(4):211-4
  8. Arora R, Lutz M, Hennerbichler A, Krappinger D, Espen D, Gabl M.Complications following internal fixation of unstable distal radius fracture with a palmar locking-plate. J Orthop Trauma.2007 May; 21 (5): 316-22.
  9. Perrens M, Allgower M, Brunner H, Burch HB, Cordey J, Ganz R et al. The concept of biological plating using the limited contact dynamic compression plate (LC-DCP). Injury 1991; 22 (1): 1-41.
  10. Venkataraman S, Ethiraj P, Naik AHS, Angadi SP. Diaphyseal fractures of the forearm in adults, comparative study of dynamic compression plate versus intramedullary nail. Int J Res Orthop 2019;5:916-20.
  11. Girish Sahni, Dimple Sahni, Kanwaljeet Singh Sandhu, Role of Dynamic Compression Plating (DCP) In Fractures of Forearm Bones, International Journal of Science and Research, 3(12), December 2014
  12. Kamlesh Jaswani, Surgical Management of Diaphyseal Fractures of Both Bones Forearm in Adults by Limited Contact Dynamic Compression Plate: A Prospective Study, Indian Journal of Basic and Applied Medical Research: June 2014: 3 (3) P. 471-478
  13. Meeravali SK, Dasaraiah CV, Management of fractures of both bones of forearm with dynamic compression plate with screw fixation. IAIM, 2015; 2(6): 145.







 

 






















 








 




 








 

 









Policy for Articles with Open Access
Authors who publish with MedPulse International Journal of Anesthesiology (Print ISSN:2579-0900) (Online ISSN: 2636-4654) agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post links to their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.