Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

The never-ending battle between proximal row carpectomy and four corner arthrodesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis for the final verdict.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2022 Feb; 75(2):711-721.JP

Abstract

While scaphoid excision combined with Four Corner Arthrodesis (FCA) or Proximal Row Carpectomy (PRC) is a commonly-used salvage procedures to treat type two and type three Scapholunate Advanced Collapse (SLAC) and Scaphoid Nonunion Advanced Collapse (SNAC)-induced degenerative arthritis, controversy remains over which treatment intervention provides superior outcomes. We searched for articles comparing a range of motion, grip strength, complications requiring reoperation, conversion to wrist arthrodesis, pain, and disability of shoulder and arm scores between FCA and PRC-treated patients. The risk of bias was assessed using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment tool. We performed a meta-analysis using Random-Effects Models. Fifteen articles (10 retrospective, 2 cross-sectional, 1 prospective, and 2 randomized trials) were included. There was no significant difference between PRC and FCA in any of the different outcome measures. The risk of bias was found consistently high across all studies. Despite the lack of high-quality evidence, based on existing literature, we recommend PRC as the preferred choice of treatment because of the simplicity of the surgical procedure, lack of hardware-related complications, and comparable long-term outcomes. Level of evidence: III - Therapeutic.

Links

Publisher Full Text (DOI)

Authors+Show Affiliations

Ahmadi AR
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC- University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GE, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Duraku LS
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC- University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GE, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
van der Oest MJW
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC- University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GE, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Hundepool CA
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC- University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GE, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Selles RW
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC- University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GE, Rotterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus MC- University Medical Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Zuidam JM
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Erasmus MC- University Medical Center Rotterdam, Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GE, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: j.zuidam@erasmusmc.nl.

MeSH

ArthrodesisCarpal BonesCross-Sectional StudiesHand StrengthHumansProspective StudiesRange of Motion, ArticularRetrospective StudiesScaphoid BoneTreatment OutcomeWrist Joint

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Systematic Review

Language

eng

PubMed ID

34802951

Citation

Ahmadi, Ali R., et al. "The Never-ending Battle Between Proximal Row Carpectomy and Four Corner Arthrodesis: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis for the Final Verdict." Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery : JPRAS, vol. 75, no. 2, 2022, pp. 711-721.
Ahmadi AR, Duraku LS, van der Oest MJW, et al. The never-ending battle between proximal row carpectomy and four corner arthrodesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis for the final verdict. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2022;75(2):711-721.
Ahmadi, A. R., Duraku, L. S., van der Oest, M. J. W., Hundepool, C. A., Selles, R. W., & Zuidam, J. M. (2022). The never-ending battle between proximal row carpectomy and four corner arthrodesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis for the final verdict. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery : JPRAS, 75(2), 711-721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2021.09.076
Ahmadi AR, et al. The Never-ending Battle Between Proximal Row Carpectomy and Four Corner Arthrodesis: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis for the Final Verdict. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2022;75(2):711-721. PubMed PMID: 34802951.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - The never-ending battle between proximal row carpectomy and four corner arthrodesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis for the final verdict. AU - Ahmadi,Ali R, AU - Duraku,Liron S, AU - van der Oest,Mark J W, AU - Hundepool,Caroline A, AU - Selles,Ruud W, AU - Zuidam,J Michiel, Y1 - 2021/10/23/ PY - 2020/08/25/received PY - 2021/07/04/revised PY - 2021/09/27/accepted PY - 2021/11/23/pubmed PY - 2022/4/13/medline PY - 2021/11/22/entrez KW - Four corner arthrodesis KW - Meta-analysis KW - Proximal row carpectomy KW - Scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse KW - Scapholunate advanced collapse KW - Systematic review SP - 711 EP - 721 JF - Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS JO - J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg VL - 75 IS - 2 N2 - While scaphoid excision combined with Four Corner Arthrodesis (FCA) or Proximal Row Carpectomy (PRC) is a commonly-used salvage procedures to treat type two and type three Scapholunate Advanced Collapse (SLAC) and Scaphoid Nonunion Advanced Collapse (SNAC)-induced degenerative arthritis, controversy remains over which treatment intervention provides superior outcomes. We searched for articles comparing a range of motion, grip strength, complications requiring reoperation, conversion to wrist arthrodesis, pain, and disability of shoulder and arm scores between FCA and PRC-treated patients. The risk of bias was assessed using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) quality assessment tool. We performed a meta-analysis using Random-Effects Models. Fifteen articles (10 retrospective, 2 cross-sectional, 1 prospective, and 2 randomized trials) were included. There was no significant difference between PRC and FCA in any of the different outcome measures. The risk of bias was found consistently high across all studies. Despite the lack of high-quality evidence, based on existing literature, we recommend PRC as the preferred choice of treatment because of the simplicity of the surgical procedure, lack of hardware-related complications, and comparable long-term outcomes. Level of evidence: III - Therapeutic. SN - 1878-0539 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/34802951/The_never_ending_battle_between_proximal_row_carpectomy_and_four_corner_arthrodesis:_A_systematic_review_and_meta_analysis_for_the_final_verdict_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -