Background. Distal radius fractures are among the most common fractures encountered in the clinical setting, with a reported incidence of 17%. Of these common fractures, it has been said 60% are intra-articular in nature. Intra-articular or unstable and comminuted fractures represent severe, high energy injuries. There is a considerable amount of controversy as to which fixation method is superior. Even the OA concludes; “comparing external fixation (EF) with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for the treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures described no consistent benefit of one treatment over another”. There are only a few randomised control trials that go beyond one year to cover the long-term follow up (over two years). There has yet to be a meta-analysis of the long-term outcomes of open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) versus external fixation. We aim to show from this meta-analysis if there is any significant difference in the outcomes of either fixation method in the long-term. Method. We pooled the data of all available randomised control trials that compare the long-term outcomes of ORIF against external fixation of distal radius fractures. We completed a systematic review of PubMed, embase, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library, from inception to December 2014. We then preformed our meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software. Results. We did not determine any significant difference in long-term outcomes when comparing ORIF with external fixation. However 6 of the 11 outcomes supported ORIF. Conclusion. There is no significant difference in the long-term outcomes between ORIF and external fixation. No meta analysis to date, short or long term, has been able to determine which is the superior, yet the future treatment of these fractures looks to be ORIF in the form of volar plating. We recommend before this becomes universal, further research must be carried out. Level of Evidence. Level 1. Disclosures. this was the first author's, Dr CJC Gouk, Masters dissertation at the University of Edinburgh. No financial support was received

Background. Distal radius fractures are common injuries but no clear consensus regarding optimal management of unstable fractures exists. Open reduction and internal fixation with volar plates is an increasingly popular but the associated complication rate can be 10%. Intramedullary nails are an alternative offering the potential advantages of reduced risk of tendon injury and intra-articular screw penetration. This article systematically reviews the published literature evaluating the biomechanics, outcomes and complications of intramedullary nails in the management of distal radius fractures. Methods. A systematic review of Medline and EMBASE databases was performed for studies reporting the biomechanics, functional outcome or complications following intramedullary nailing of distal radius fractures. Critical appraisal was performed with respect to validated quality assessment scales. Results. 16 studies were included for review. The biomechanical studies concluded that intramedullary nails had at least comparable strength to locking plates. The clinical studies reported that IM nailing was associated with comparable ROM, functional outcome and grip strength to alternative fixation techniques. However, the mean complication rate was 17.6% (range 0 to 50%) with the most common complication being neurapraxia of the superficial radial nerve in 9.5%. Conclusion. This systematic review of pooled data from published series has shown that IM nailing can give comparable clinical results to current treatment modalities in extra-articular and simple intra-articular distal radius fractures. However the evidence is insufficient to determine whether IM nailing has any clinically important advantage over well-established alternatives. The complication rate reported is higher than that in contemporary studies for volar plating and this raises concerns about the role of this technique particularly when comparative studies have failed to show any major advantage to its use. Further adequately powered RCTs comparing the technique to both volar plates and percutaneous wire fixation are required. Level of evidence. IIa – systematic review of cohort studies. Conflict of Interests. The authors confirm that they have no relevant financial disclosures or conflicts of interest. Ethical approval was not sought as this was a systematic review