COMPARISON OF BRIDGING AND NON BRIDGING EXTERNAL FIXATION IN THE TREATMENT OF DISTAL RADIUS FRACTURE

Abstract

Purpose: External fixation is a popular treatment method of unstable distal radius fractures. There has been much debate and confusion however regarding the use of bridging versus non-bridging fixation. The aim of this study is to define the indications for bridging and non-bridging external fixation in the treatment of unstable distal radius fractures. The study also endeavours to evaluate the complications and pitfalls associated with this treatment and to determine if non-expert surgeons can reproduce successful outcomes.

Methods: Between January 1995 and December 2000, 641 patients with fractures of the distal radius were treated at our institution with external fixation. The fractures were treated either by bridging or non-bridging external fixation. Demographic data was collected prospectively for these patients including their hospital number, date of birth, gender, age at injury, mode of injury, type of external fixator and whether the fracture was an open or closed injury. Further information was collected retrospectively from review of case notes and x-rays and included AO classification, status of the operating surgeon, duration of fixation, and complications.

Results: Patients treated with bridging external fixation had significantly more mal unions in terms of dorsal angulation and shortening. The non-bridging fixators were better able to maintain and in some cases improve on the immediate post external fixation measurements. Minor pin tract infections were more common in the non-bridging group.

Conclusions: Non-bridging external fixation is the treatment of choice for unstable fractures of the distal radius with sufficient space for the placement of pins in the distal fragment. A predictable outcome with low complication rate can be expected.