À compter du 1er décembre 2023, l’accès à POEMs et à Essential Evidence Plus ne fera plus partie des avantages offerts aux membres de l’AMC.
Question clinique
Do patients with scaphoid fractures who are managed with initial cast immobilization have similar outcomes to those who undergo immediate surgery?
L’Essentiel
In this study, conservatively speaking, the outcomes of patients with scaphoid fractures managed with cast immobilization are comparable to those managed with surgical fixation. Fewer than 10% of casted patients will experience nonunion requiring subsequent surgery 2b
Référence
Plan de l'etude: Randomized controlled trial (nonblinded)
Financement: Government
Cadre: Outpatient (specialty)
Sommaire
These researchers randomized persons 16 years or older with a clear bicortical fracture of the scaphoid who presented to one of 31 orthopedic departments in England and Wales to receive either surgical fixation (n = 219) or cast immobilization (n = 220). To be eligible, the persons had to be evaluated within 2 weeks of injury and have a 2-mm or less displacement. The casts, worn for 6 weeks to 10 weeks, sat below the elbow and did not have to include the thumb. In the casted patients, if a follow-up radiograph taken 6 weeks to 12 weeks later suggested nonunion, the patient underwent computed tomography and subsequent surgical fixation if the nonunion was confirmed. After 52 weeks, the researchers evaluated the primary outcome—the score on a 100-point scale that assesses wrist pain and disability. The authors didn't use the conservative intention-to-treat approach to evaluate the data. They also report that a 6-point difference on this scale is, conservatively, the minimal clinically important difference. After 52 weeks, they had primary outcome data on 186 (85%) of the surgically treated patients and 176 (80%) of the casted patients. Losing 20% of patients is a worrisome degree of loss. Patients in both groups experienced improvements in their pain and disability scores compared with baseline with virtually no net difference between them. Of the casted patients, 17 (7.7%) had subsequent surgery for nonunion. More surgically treated patients (31/219, 14%) had a potentially serious surgical complication than did casted patients (3/220, 1.4%), but more of the casted patients had cast-related problems (18% vs 2%). Additionally, after one year, 2% of casted patients had nonunion compared with 1% of surgically treated patients. So the total number of cast or surgical complications between the groups was similar. This seems like the perfect scenario for shared decision-making: 2 options, one more invasive than the other, each with trade-offs but comparable outcomes.
Reviewer
Henry C. Barry, MD, MS
Professor
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI
Commentaires
Shared decision making
I appreciate the comment about “shared decision making”. However, another factor we have to consider is cost to our universal health system. Orthopaedic surgery is not cheap. If the outcome is the same, then the cheaper option will be the one to go with, even if the patient would like to avoid a cast.
conservative fracture treatment
ORSF is in many cases the first option chosen nowadays where conservative fracture treatment has far less adverse effects and as this study shows same outcomes. In many cases surgery is always a second option once conservative treatment fails so delaying the possible adverse effects of surgery.
More comparative studies are needed with other extremities fracture treatment conservative vs. operative.
Read / re-visit Watson Jones fracture treatment of 1930 !
helpful to know if this comes up in general practice
As above
Cast vs surgery
It does offer a balanced choice
KXU1dCuFza
DEADPgAYaGLAxRqaaXm2
r3aduo2FXy
qPTte8tmWIhv8syO6XoF