Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of the functional and radiological results of Paris plaster cast and ulnar gutter splint in the conservative treatment of fractures of the fifth metacarpal

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim

In the treatment protocol of fractures of the fifth metacarpal, closed reduction and immobilization is generally recommended. This study aimed to compare the radiological and functional results of short-arm plaster cast and a forearm U-splint.

Patients and methods

Between January 2011 and June 2012, the study comprised a total of 122 cases with 64 (52.4 %) in the cast group and 58 (47.6 %) in the splint group. The cases were 92 (75.4 %) males and 30 (24.6 %) females with a mean age of 30.56 ± 12.27 years (range 10–66 years). Two groups were formed according to the surgical treatment plans of the two surgeons who were to follow up the patients.

Results

No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of age, duration of the cast or splint and follow-up period (p > 0.05). The grip strength of Group A was determined as 90.38 ± 1.77 % of the healthy side and Group B as 90.58 ± 1.65 %. No statistically significant difference was seen between the groups in respect of grip strength (p > 0.05). The degree of dorsal angulation pre-application, post-application and after removal of the groups showed no statistically significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

No superiority was seen in the clinical and radiological results of the two different treatment protocols applied to fractures of the fifth metacarpal. However, when the complications created by a plaster cast and pressure wounds are taken into consideration, the application of a short-arm U-splint can be said to be a better option.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kiliç A, Sökücü S, Basilgan S, Yeniocak S, Cetinkaya E, Parmaksizoğlu AS, Kabukcuoğlu YS (2012) Outcomes of four distinct fixation methods in the conservative treatment of fifth metacarpal neck fractures. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 18:167–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. DeJonge JJ, Kingma J, Van der Lei B, Klassen HJ (1994) Fracture of the metacarpals. A retrospective analysis of incidence and aetiology and a review of the English language literature. Injury 25:365–369

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Tavassoli J, Ruland RT, Hogan CJ, Cannon DL (2005) Three cast techniques for the treatment of extra-articular metacarpal fractures. Comparison of short-term outcomes and final fracture alignments. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2196–2201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Harris AR, Beckenbaugh RD, Nettrour JF, Rizzo M (2009) Metacarpal neck fractures: results of treatment with traction reduction and cast immobilization. Hand (N Y) 4:161–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ozturk I, Erturer E, Sahin F, Seckin F, Toker S, Uzun M et al (2008) Effects of fusion angle on functional results following non-operative treatment for fracture of the neck of the fifth metacarpal. Injury 39:1464–1466

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Garcia-Elias M, An KN, Amadio PC, Cooney WP, Linscheid RL (1989) Reliability of carpal angle determinations. J Hand Surg Am 14:1017–1021

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sahu A, Gujral SS, Batra S, Mills SP, Srinivasan MS (2012) The current practice of the management of little finger metacarpal fractures. a review of the literature and results of a survey conducted among upper limb surgeons in the United Kingdom. Hand Surg 17:55–63 Review

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Taşbaş BA, Ozakpınar HR, Delialioğlu MO, Dağlar B, Bayrakcı K, Günel U (2011) Real angulation degree in fifth metacarpal neck fracture. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 22:85–88

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hofmeister EP, Kim J, Shin AY (2008) Comparison of 2 methods of immobilization of fifth metacarpal neck fractures: a prospective randomized study. J Hand Surg Am 33:1362–1368

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Potenza V, Caterini R, De Maio F, Bisicchia S, Farsetti P (2012) Fractures of the neck of the fifth metacarpal bone. Medium-term results in 28 cases treated by percutaneous transverse pinning. Injury 43:242-245 doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.10.036 [Epub 2011 Dec 10]

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Birndorf MS, Daley R, Greenwald DP (1997) Metacarpal fracture angulation decreases flexor mechanical efficiency in human hands. Plast Reconstr Surg 99:1079–1085

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Magnuson PB (1928) Fractures of the metacarpals and phalanges. JAMA 91:1339–1340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Green DP, Butler TE (1996) Fractures and dislocations in the hand. In: Rockwood CA, Green DP, Bucholtz RW, Heckman JD (eds) Fractures in adults, vol 1. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, pp 658–664

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Poolman RW, Goslings JC, Lee JB, Statius Muller M, Steller EP, Struijs PAA (2005) Conservative treatment for closed fifth metacarpal neck fractures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev Issue 3:CD003210. Review

  17. Hunter JM, Cowen NJ (1970) Fifth metacarpal fractures in a compensation clinic population. A report on one hundred and thirty-three cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52:1159–1165

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Statius Muller MG, Poolman RW, van Hoogstraten MJ, Steller EP (2003) Immediate mobilization gives good results in boxer’s fractures with volar angulation up to 70 degrees: a prospective randomized trial comparing immediate mobilization with cast immobilization. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 123:534-537 [Epub 2003 Aug 28]

    Google Scholar 

  19. 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ali A, Hamman J, Mass DP (1999) The biomechanical effects of angulated boxer’s fractures. J Hand Surg Am 24:835–844

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Stanton JS, Dias JJ, Burke FD (2007) Fractures of the tubular bones of the hand. J Hand Surg Eur 32:626–636 [Epub 2007 Sep 21]

    Google Scholar 

  22. Winter M, Balaguer T, Bessière C, Carles M, Lebreton E. (2007) Surgical treatment of the boxer’s fracture: transverse pinning versus intramedullary pinning. J Hand Surg Eur 32:709-713 [Epub 2007 Sep 29]

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dr. Lütfi Kırdar Kartal Training and Research Hospital, Semsi Denizer Cad. E5. Yanyol Cevizli Kavsagı Kartal, 34890, Istanbul, Turkey

    Deniz Gulabi, Gultekin Sıtkı Cecen, Halil Ibrahim Bekler & Fevzi Saglam

  2. Ümraniye Training and Research Hospital, Ümraniye, Istanbul, Turkey

    Cem Coskun Avci

  3. Bakirkoy Training and Research Hospital, Bakirkoy, Istanbul, Turkey

    Erdogan Merih

Authors
  1. Deniz Gulabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cem Coskun Avci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gultekin Sıtkı Cecen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Halil Ibrahim Bekler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fevzi Saglam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Erdogan Merih
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deniz Gulabi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gulabi, D., Avci, C.C., Cecen, G.S. et al. A comparison of the functional and radiological results of Paris plaster cast and ulnar gutter splint in the conservative treatment of fractures of the fifth metacarpal. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 24, 1167–1173 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-013-1290-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-013-1290-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation