Wrist Osteoarthritis
Conditions
Brief summary
There are two types of interventions to treat a post-traumatic wrist osteoarthritis: the proximal row carpectomy and the four corner fusion. They are used to reduce pain and to maintain the mobility. In previous studies are shown that the proximal row carpectomy shows a better mobility of the wrist postoperatively, whereas the four corner fusion has lower progression of radiocarpale osteoarthritis. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical, radiological and subjective outcomes after the treatment with a proximal row carpectomy or a four corner fusion.
Detailed description
Two surgical procedures are used to treat a post-traumatic wrist osteoarthritis, especially after scaphoid non-union advanced collapse (SNAC) and scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC): the proximal row carpectomy and the four corner fusion. Both surgical procedures are rescue operations. They are used to reduce pain and to maintain the mobility, compared to a complete stiffening of the wrist. In previous studies are shown that the proximal row carpectomy shows a better mobility of the wrist postoperatively and a lower complication rate, whereas the four corner fusion has a lower progression of radiocarpale osteoarthritis and a better grip strength. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical, radiological and subjective outcomes after the treatment with a proximal row carpectomy or a four corner fusion.
Interventions
PROCEDUREproximal row carpectomy
excision of the scaphoid, lunate and triquetrum
PROCEDUREfour corner fusion
excision of the scaphoid and stiffening of the lunate, capitate and triquetrum by a plate
Sponsors
Schulthess Klinik
Study design
Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* post-traumatic wrist osteoarthritis * treated with a proximal row carpectomy or four corner fusion * signed written informed consent
Exclusion criteria
* no knowledge of German
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Range of motion of the wrist | participants will be followed up by an expected average of 4.5 years | measurements of flexion/extension,supination/pronation and radial-/ulnarduction of the wrist |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| complication rate | participants will be followed up by an expected average of 4.5 years | Detection of complications of both surgical procedures |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ) | participants will be followed up by an expected average of 4.5 years | Comparison of proximal row carpectomy and four corner fusion in respect to MHQ |
| grip strength | participants will be followed up by an expected average of 4.5 years | measurement of grip strength |
| Detection of radiological parameters | participants will be followed up by an expected average of 4.5 years | Detection of arthrosis fossa lunata, impingement and loosening |
| Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) | participants will be followed up by an expected average of 4.5 years | Comparison of proximal row carpectomy and four corner fusion in rsespect to QuickDASH |
| Patient-Rated Wirst Evaluation (PRWE) | participants will be followed up by an expected average of 4.5 years | Comparison of proximal row carpectomy and four corner fusion in respect to PRWE |
Countries
Switzerland
Outcome results
None listed