Skip to main content

Antegrade intramedullary splinting or percutaneous retrograde crossed pinning for displaced neck fractures of the fifth metacarpal?

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery volume 127, pages 435–440 (2007)Cite this article

Abstract

Introduction

It is generally accepted that severely displaced or malrotated neck fractures of the fifth metacarpal should be treated by closed reduction and pinning. As antegrade intramedullary splinting avoids adhesions of the extensor hood and provides intramedullary stability this technique seems to be advantageous in comparison with traditional retrograde percutaneous crossed pinning. We raised the question whether the antegrade technique would give clinical and radiological results superior to the retrograde technique and investigated this within a comparative clinical study.

Materials and methods

Thirty patients with displaced neck fractures of the fifth metacarpal who received operative treatment were included in a retrospective cohort study. Data was analysed from medical records and a clinical and radiological outcome evaluation was performed. Fifteen patients had antegrade intramedullary splinting and fifteen patients retrograde percutaneous pinning. Median time for follow-up was 17 and 18 months, respectively.

Results

A significantly better outcome was found after antegrade splinting for ROM restriction of the metacarpophalangeal joint (0° vs. −15°; P = 0.016), shortening (P = 0.029), pain (0 vs. 5; VAS 0–100; P = 0.026), and overall assessment by the Steel score (400 vs. 357; P = 0.001). There was no statistical difference in grip strength and functional assessment by the DASH score.

Conclusion

From our clinical and radiological data we conclude that antegrade intramedullary splinting is superior to retrograde percutaneous crossed pinning and thus should be preferentially considered for displaced neck fractures of the fifth metacarpal.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Abdon P, Mühlow A, Stigsson L, Thorngren KG, Werner CO, Westman L (1984) Subcapital fractures of the fifth metacarpal bone. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 103:231–234

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Arafa M, Haines J, Noble J, Carden D (1986) Immediate mobilization of fractures of the neck of the fifth metacarpal. Injury 17:277–278

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Barry P, Regnard PJ, Bensa P (1991) Bundled wiring in fractures of the neck of the fifth metacarpal. 50 cases. Ann Chir Main Memb Super 10:469–475

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Beal D, Rongieres M, Mansat M (1991) Bundled central medullary bone wiring. Method of choice in the treatment of fractures of the neck of the fifth metacarpal necessitating a reduction. 30 cases. Ann Chir Main Memb Super 19:463–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bloem JJ (1971) The treatment and prognosis of uncomplicated dislocated fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges. Arch Chir Neerl 23:55–65

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bosworth DM (1937) Internal splinting of fractures of the fifth metacarpal. J Bone Joint Surg 19:826–827

    Google Scholar 

  7. Braakman M (1998) Are lateral X-rays useful in the treatment of fractures of the fourth and fifth metacarpals? Injury 29:1–3

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Braakman M, Oderwald EE, Haentjens MH (1998) Functional taping of fractures of the 5th metacarpal results in a quicker recovery. Injury 29:5–9

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Eichenholtz SN, Rizzo PC (1961) Fracture of the neck of the fifth metacarpal bone—is over-treatment justified? JAMA 178:425–426

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ford DJ, Ali MS, Steel WM (1989) Fractures of the fifth metacarpal neck: is reduction or immobilisation necessary? J Hand Surg 14B:165–167

    Google Scholar 

  11. Foucher G (1995) “Bouquet” osteosynthesis in metacarpal neck fractures: a series of 66 patients. J Hand Surg 20A:S86–90

    Google Scholar 

  12. Foucher G, Chemorin C, Sibilly A (1976) Nouveau procédé d’ostéosynthèse original dans les fractures du tiers distal du cinquième métacarpien. Nouv Presse Méd 5:1139–1140

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Galanakis I, Aligizakis A, Katonis P, Papadokostakis G, Stergiopoulos K, Hadjipavlou A (2003) Treatment of closed unstable metacarpal fractures using percutaneous transverse fixation with Kirschner wires. J Trauma 55:509–513

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Harding IJ, Parry D, Barrington RL (2001) The use of a moulded metacarpal brace versus neighbour strapping for fractures of the little finger metacarpal neck. J Hand Surg 26B:261–263

    Google Scholar 

  15. Holst-Nielsen F (1976) Subcapital fractures of the four ulnar metacarpal bones. Hand 8:290–293

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C (1996) Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand). Am J Ind Med 29:602–608

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kermad F, Cazeneuve JF, Hassan Y, Rihan B, Boustani H (2002) Two-pin L fixation of fractures of the fifth metacarpal neck. Acta Orthop Belg 68:231–234

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Konradsen L, Nielsen PT, Albrecht-Beste E (1990) Functional treatment of metacarpal fractures 100 randomized cases with or without fixation. Acta Orthop Scand 61:531–534

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kuokkanen HO, Mulari-Keränen SK, Niskanen RO, Haapala JK, Korkala OL (1999) Treatment of subcapital fractures of the fifth metacarpal bone: a prospective randomised comparison between functional treatment and reposition and splinting. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 33:315–317

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Larkin G, Brüser P, Safi A (1997) Possibilities and limits of intramedullary Kirschner wire osteosynthesis in treatment of metacarpal fractures. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 29:192–196

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Leung YL, Beredjiklian PK, Monaghan BA, Bozentka DJ (2002) Radiographic assessment of small finger metacarpal neck fractures. J Hand Surg 27A:443–448

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lowdon IM (1986) Fractures of the metacarpal neck of the little finger. Injury 17:189–192

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Maitra A, Sen B (1990) Displaced boxers’ fractures: a simple and effective method of external splintage. Br J Clin Pract 44:348–351

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. McKerrell J, Bowen V, Johnston G, Zondervan J (1987) Boxer’s fractures—conservative or operative management? J Trauma 27:486–490

    PubMed  CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Poolman RW, Goslings JC, Lee JB, Statius Muller M, Steller EP, Struijs PA (2005) Conservative treatment for closed fifth (small finger) metacarpal neck fractures, Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3, CD003210

  26. Porter ML, Hodgkinson JP, Hirst P, Wharton MR, Cunliffe M (1988) The boxers’ fracture: a prospective study of functional recovery. Arch Emerg Med 5:212–215

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Prokop A, Kulus S, Helling HJ, Burger C, Rehm KE (1999) Are there guidelines for the treatment of metacarpal fractures? Personal results and literature analysis of the last 12 years. Unfallchirurg 102:50–58

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith RJ, Peimer CA (1977) Injuries to the metacarpal bones and joints. Adv Surg 11:341–374

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Steel WM (1988) Articular fractures. In: Barton NJ (ed) Fractures of the hand and wrist. Churchill Livingstone, New York, pp 55–73

  30. Theeuwen GA, Lemmens JA, van Niekerk JL (1991) Conservative treatment of boxer’s fracture: a retrospective analysis. Injury 22:394–396

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Trabelsi A, Dusserre F, Asencio G, Bertin R (2001). Traitement orthopédique des fractures du col du cinquième métacarpien: ètude prospective. Chir Main 20:226–230

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Wong TC, Ip FK, Yeung (2006) Comparison between percutaneous transverse fixation and intramedullary K-wires in treating closed fractures of the metacarpal neck of the little finger. J Hand Surg 31B:61–65

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Professor Martin Scholz (Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf) for linguistic review.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Trauma and Hand Surgery, University Hospital, Moorenstraße 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany

    M. Schädel-Höpfner, M. Wild, J. Windolf & W. Linhart

Authors
  1. M. Schädel-Höpfner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Wild
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Windolf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. W. Linhart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Schädel-Höpfner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schädel-Höpfner, M., Wild, M., Windolf, J. et al. Antegrade intramedullary splinting or percutaneous retrograde crossed pinning for displaced neck fractures of the fifth metacarpal?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 127, 435–440 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-006-0254-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-006-0254-y

Keywords

  • Neck fracture of the fifth metacarpal
  • Displacement
  • Antegrade intramedullary splinting
  • Retrograde crossed pinning