Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 131233

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : August | Volume : 16 | Issue : 8 | Page : RC06 - RC10 Full Version

Comparison of Antegrade Percutaneous Intramedullary K-wire Fixation and Transverse Pinning for Treatment of Unstable Displaced Metacarpal Neck and Shaft Fractures: A Prospective Interventional Study


Published: August 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/56686.16739
Ansari Emad Yaqub, Navneet Singh, Punit Tiwari, Sandeep Singh Jaura, Bhupinder Singh Brar

1. Senior Resident, Department of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India. 5. Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Navneet Singh,
Associate Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Kumarhatti, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India.
E-mail: navneet9140@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Metacarpal fractures account for upto 10% of all body fractures and 36% of all hand fractures in adolescents, young adults, and active adults. Among metacarpal fractures, fracture of the metacarpal shaft and neck are most common after direct trauma, roadside accidents, or sports injuries. The ratio of the shaft to the neck is 1:2. Closed reduction and plaster of paris cast can be used to treat the majority of these fractures conservatively. Unstable and comminuted fractures necessitate surgery.

Aim: To compare the clinical, functional and radiological outcomes in antegrade intramedullary fixation and transverse pinning of metacarpal fractures in patients of unstable and displaced metacarpal shaft and neck fractures.

Materials and Methods: A single-institutional prospective interventional study identified 60 cases of metacarpal fractures between November 2019 to August 2021 in the Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical college and Hospital, Kumarhatti, Himachal Pradesh, India. Each of the cases met the inclusion criteria for closed extra-articular fractures, displaced and unstable fractures of the metacarpal bone. The patients were divided into two groups having 30 subjects each, randomly allotted to two groups (Antegrade intramedullary K-wiring and Transverse Pinning). Outcomes were compared for range of movement by the American Society of Hand Surgeons Total Active Motion score (ASSH TAM), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and radiological parameters (Angulation). Patients were followed-up for 12 weeks. Complications were listed in terms of pin site infection.

Results: Most of the patients were found to be in the third decade of life. The fracture union was achieved at 8±2 weeks. Clinical evaluation done by VAS score which was found to be statistically insignificant between two groups (p-value=0.243). Radiological assessment evaluated by measuring postoperative angulation between two groups was found to be statistically insignificant (p-value=0.248). Difference in functional evaluation between the two groups done by ASSH TAM was found to statistically significant between the groups (p-value=0.036).

Conclusion: Both antegrade intramedullary K-wiring and transverse pinning demonstrate good and comparable results for extra-articular neck and shaft metacarpal fractures. However, the former is superior in terms of final range of motion as per ASSH TAM score.

Keywords

Antegrade intramedullary K-wiring, Closed reduction, Metacarpal fractures

Metacarpal fractures constitute up to 10% of all fractures throughout the body and 36% of all hand fractures in young adults (1). Metacarpal fractures are most common in men between the ages of 10-29 years (2). Across the life span, males have a higher incidence of fracture than females. Female ratios for those aged 60 and above exceed male ratios (3). Fractures of the metacarpal bones in the hand account for 14-28% of all hospital visits following trauma induced by a variety of sources, including assault, traffic accidents, industrial accidents and agricultural accidents (4). The most common types of injury appear to be driving and an accidental fall. Accidental falls are the leading cause of fractures in the lower age groups as well as in those aged 50 and above. Now high percentage of transport accidents in all age groups resulting in metacarpal fractures is observed (3),(5). The 5th metacarpal fracture is the most common of all metacarpal fractures. Fracture of the fifth metacarpal neck, commonly known as boxer’s fracture, is one of the most common hand injuries. They account for 20% of all hand fractures (6). Closed Reduction and Plaster of Paris cast can be used to treat the majority of these fractures conservatively. Unstable and comminuted fractures necessitate surgery (1).

Open fractures, any angulation of the fracture >30°, rotational deformity of fracture more than 10°, and extensive (>5 mm) shortening of the metacarpal are all indications for surgery. Similarly, irreducible or unstable fractures and multiple digit involvement necessitate surgical intervention [7-9]. The majority of shaft and neck fractures can be treated without surgery if an adequate reduction has been achieved. Displaced fractures can be treated with fracture reduction and K-wire fixation (10). K-wiring in metacarpal fractures is a minimally invasive method used now-a-days for the fixation of metacarpal after closed reduction and remains the mainstay of treatment (11). Multiple techniques with K-wires are documented: antegrade intramedullary K-wire, retrograde intramedullary K-wire, retrograde cross pinning with K-wire, transverse pinning with K-wire external fixation, intraosseous wiring, and plate fixation have all been used to treat displaced and unstable metacarpal neck and shaft fractures (12).

Berkman EF and Miles GH described transverse pinning in 1943. It is a relatively quick to perform technique which can be utilised in majority of the metacarpal fractures. It is beneficial as the K-wires does not penetrate the joint and the native range of motion can be started as soon as the fracture fixation is done. Though it has some disadvantages as it may injure the neuromuscular structures which are lying between the web spaces, it still remains one of the commonly used technique (13),(14).

Equally popular is antegrade intramedullary pinning described by Foucher G in 1976. In it K-wires are inserted from the base of the metacarpal. This technique also spares the joints which are proximal and distal to the fracture site. But in this K-wires has a chance of damaging the joints if proper caution is not taken while inserting and trajectory of K-wires is not visualised under C Arm (15),(16).

A skilled Orthopaedic Surgeon can utilise both these techniques as per his preference. But in literature there is study which actually compare these two techniques (8). The main purpose of present study was to bridge this gap and to see whether recommendations given by this study can be applied to the population in our country. Hence the present study was conducted with an aim to compare the clinical, functional and radiological outcomes in antegrade intramedullary fixation and transverse pinning of metacarpal fractures in patients of unstable and displaced metacarpal shaft and neck fractures.

Material and Methods

A single-centre prospective interventional study was carried out after taking approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) (MMMCH/IEC/20/337) in the Maharishi Markandeshwar Medical College and Hospital, Kumarhatti, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India, from November 2019 to August 2021. Informed written consent was taken from the patients before surgery and the patients were explained about the rehabilitation program after the procedure and also for possible complications if any.

Sample size calculation: The sample size was calculated; taking standard deviation of 24.2 based on the prior literature with a mean difference of 18 between the samples (17). Assuming α-error (significance) of 0.05 and power (1- ß) of 80%, the effective sample size on the basis of TAM came out to be 28 in each group for the comparison. This number has been increased to 30 per group (a total of 60) to allow for a predicted dropout from treatment.

Inclusion criteria:

1. Apex dorsal angulation greater than 30° on a pronated oblique view of plain radiographs of hand.
2. Rotational deformities.

Exclusion criteria:

1. Undisplaced metacarpal neck and shaft fractures.
2. Previous deformity at Metacarpo-phalangeal Joint.
3. Rheumatoid arthritis.
4. Associated ligament or tendon injury.
5. Traumatic arthritis.
6. Diabetes.
7. Open fractures.

A total of 60 patients were included in this study, of metacarpal neck and shaft fractures from Outpatient Department (OPD) and Inpatient Department (IPD) and divided into two groups of 30 each.

Group A- Treated by using antegrade intramedullary K-wiring.
Group B- Treated with transverse pinning of K-wires through metacarpals.

Baseline characteristics (including age, gender, mechanism of injury), VAS, and angulation of displacement were calculated and noted preoperatively and on postoperative follow-up. The patients were followed-up for 12 weeks postoperatively, and the result was interpreted by comparison of both groups in terms of functional, clinical and radiological outcome.

Surgical Procedures

At the commencement of the procedure, closed reduction was attempted, as per the Jahss maneuver (18). Under the C-arm, the alignment and reduction were checked.

Antegrade K-wiring technique: Patient was positioned in a supine posture with the arm pronated on a sidearm extension table. On the dorsal part of the hand, a tiny incision was made at the base of the injured metacarpal- ulnar side for the 4th and 5th metacarpals, radial side for the 2nd and radial or ulnar side for the 3rd metacarpal- followed by using a 2.0 mm drill for opening the bony cortex of the metaphysis. After that, a 1.0-1.8 mm K-wire was inserted into the intramedullary cavity through the hole drilled in the metacarpal bone and was passed through the fracture under the C-arm after fracture reduction. Under the C-arm, the K-wire’s stability and location were evaluated. A second K-wire was put through the same cortical incision if the first failed to provide adequate stability. A second drill hole was produced if necessary for the insertion of the second K-wire. All of the K-wires were bent and left outside the skin, and the pin entry site was covered with a sterile dressing (Table/Fig 1) (15),(19).

Transverse pinning technique: Patient positioned in a supine position on operation theatre table with the arm pronated on a sidearm extension table. Manipulation and internal fixation with 2-3 K-wires of 1.0-1.8 mm thickness were used to close the fracture. The first K-wire was placed percutaneously near the fracture, perpendicular to the ulnar border of the hand, and fixed with the next metacarpal, resulting in a four cortical purchase. The 2nd and 3rd K-wires were then percutaneously inserted parallel to the first wire and distally or proximally to the fracture site depending on site of the fracture site. The K-wires were bent and cut outside the skin after confirming the sufficiency and stability of the fracture fixation, while the pins were bent and left outside the skin with pin entry site to be covered with a sterile dressing piece (Table/Fig 2) (13),(14).

Patients received volar slab for two weeks after either procedure. X-rays were taken postoperatively (Table/Fig 3). At the two-week follow-up, the pin sites were checked for infection, and the patient was allowed active digit mobilisation. At four weeks, the same was done to check for any pin site infection if any, and they were referred to the physiotherapy department for guided passive and active mobilisation of the same. After six weeks full active functioning was advised in patients of both groups, some were referred to the physiotherapy department to aid in rehabilitation. The pins were removed in the procedure room of the OPD after the fracture had united, with all aseptic measures used.

After a full recovery, patients were released from OPD follow-up. Each patient was clinically observed for a minimum of 12 weeks.

Evaluation of Outcome

Range of movement: Calculated by ASSH TAM (8),(20). Functional Assessment was done by ASSH TAM score. The ASSH TAM is the sum of flexion at metacarpophalangeal joints and interphalangeal joints minus the extensor deficit and is quantified in degrees (8),(20),(21).

TAM=Total active flexion (MP+PIP+DIP)-lack of active extension (MP+PIP+DIP) (MP- Metacarpophalangeal, PIP-Proximal Interphalangeal, DIP-Distal Interphalangeal).

For digits (2-5), this system considers the degree of flexion at the metacarpophalangeal joint (0-85°), the proximal interphalangeal (0-110°) and distal interphalangeal joints (0-65°) total of 260°, and the degree of extension lag at the metacarpophalangeal and proximal and distal interphalangeal joints (8). Based on this grading ASSH TAM was calculated and the results were compiled.

Finger Goniometer was used to assess active range of motion of the hand through Metacarpophalangeal, proximal interphalangeal and distal interphalangeal joints were noted down preoperatively and postoperatively for comparison.

Clinical evaluation: Independent Clinical Evaluation was done utilising VAS (22). This contains VAS for pain in the injured metacarpophalangeal joint during daily activities, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating the most severe pain.

Radiographic evaluation: Independent radiological assessment was done by comparing preoperative and postoperative angulation. Preoperative and postoperative angulation on x-rays of hand was calculated by drawing two lines along the longitudinal axis of proximal and distal fragments and calculating the angle made between them.

Statistical Analysis

Data were described in terms of range; mean±Standard Deviation (±SD), frequencies (number of cases) and relative frequencies (percentages) as appropriate. To determine whether the data were normally distributed, a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used. Comparison of quantitative variables between the study groups was done using Student’s t-test and within the group; Wilcoxon rank test was used. All statistical calculations were done using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 21.0 version (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) statistical program for Microsoft Windows. SPSS generated randomisation file was kept with the author 4 and the patients were allocated to 2 groups according to the sequence in it.

Results

When the patients were divided into different age groups, 41.67% of patients were from the age group between 20-29 years of age, followed by 20% of patients above the age group of 50 years. When coming to gender, out of 60 patients, 39 were males and 21 females, (Table/Fig 4).

Based on the mechanism of injury, three groups were, Road Traffic Accidents (RTA), fall from height, blunt trauma (hit or blow to the hand with a blunt object, household or agricultural injuries, Punch). About 36.67% of patients had an injury from RTA, 36.67% had fall as a mechanism of injury, 26.66% contributed to the group of blunt trauma (Table/Fig 5).

VAS score in all patients at the time of presentation was found to be a mean of 7.53 in group A and 7.67 in group B. VAS score at 12 weeks was 1.23 in group A and 1.4 in group B with the difference between them found to be insignificant with p-value of 0.243.

The mean preoperative angulation in patients on presentation was found to be mean of 47.6° in group A and 48.23° in group B. At the time of 12 weeks follow-up the angulation was found to be of 8.63° in group A and 9.2° in group B, with the difference between them statistically insignificant with p-value of 0.248 (Table/Fig 6).

The mean preoperative range of motion was calculated by ASSH TAM across metacarpophalangeal, and both interphalangeal joints were found to be mean of 106.5° in group A and 119° in group B. At 12 weeks follow-up ASSH TAM was found to be mean of 252° in group A and mean of 245° in group B. The difference was found to be statistically significant with a p-value of 0.036 (Table/Fig 6).

The intragroup evaluation of preoperative and postoperative variables in terms of functional, clinical and radiological outcome was highly significant with p-value of 0.0001 (Table/Fig 6). Two patients in group A and four patients in group B had pin site infection which was treated by oral antibiotics.

Discussion

The influential textbook Rockwood and Green’s mentions CRPP (Closed reduction and percutaneous pinning) as the standard management of metacarpal fractures (11). Out of the various constructs available, antegrade intramedullary k-wiring and transverse pinning have gained popularity over the traditional retrograde technique. Present study was undertaken to know which of these two techniques is advantageous in restoration of hand function in terms of range of motion, VAS, and radiological angulation. The age distribution in present study was similar to those seen by Nakashian MN et al., (2) and De Jonge JJ et al., (3) who found the peak incidence to be in the second and third decade of life. This may be attributed to the active lifestyle of people in this age group with more participation in cultural and sports activities. The gender distribution was found to be similar to that of Nakashian M et al., (2) and De Jonge et al JJ et al., (3) with males accounting most in the 2nd, 3rd decade and male-female ratio equal in patients above 50 years of age. The increased incidence in females after the age of 50 years may be due to the increased prevalence of osteoporosis in females after menopause.

In present study major cause of metacarpal fractures was seen as RTA and fall from height. This may be attributed to our hospital is situated in the lower hilly Himalayan region. This was similar to Gudmunsen T and Borgen L (23) who found falls and hitting a wall to be the main cause of metacarpal fractures but in contrast to De Jonge JJ et al., who found accidental falls to be the leading cause in groups of age <5 and >50 years (3).

VAS in present study was seen to have decreased to the range of 1-2 in both the groups at 12 weeks. This may be attributed to the early passive and active range of motion under the guidance of the physiotherapist and later by the consolidation of the fracture at eight weeks. This finding was consistent with as seen by Wong TC et al., and Sletten IN et al., (24),(25). The mean postoperative angulation in present study at final follow-up was in the range of acceptable limits with resulting matching those seen by Winter M et al., and Moon SJ et al., (17),(26). This may be attributed to proper reduction and application of postoperative Plaster of Paris slab so that the fracture site attains some stability before the physiotherapy is started.

The range of motion as assessed by the ASSH TAM score was found to be 252° in group A and 245° in group B. The difference was found to be statistically significant. This shows functional outcome to be better in group A as compared to group B. This may be attributed to more stability of the intramedullary implant with it acting as load sharing implant. Another factor that could have contributed is that there was no alteration in the range of motion of neighboring metacarpal in contrast to transverse pinning in which the neighbouring metacarpal is fixed to the fractured metacarpal. This was in contrast to that seen by Sletten IN et al., and Moon SJ et al., who have found TAM in both the groups to be comparatively equal with no statistically significant difference between them (25),(26).

Both these techniques are minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of metacarpal fractures. Any one of these can be used to treat metacarpal fractures. Though both techniques are relatively easy even then great care has to be taken that the wires do not penetrate and damage the articular surface for this may in itself lead to poor outcome (8). Also, there are chances of fracture of the metacarpal base while making the entry hole for intramedullary wire and transverse pinning wire may damage the structures between the metacarpals (8). So, in no way, we can say that these are easy surgeries. A minor complication can lead to serious adverse effects and later on poor outcomes. So, every effort should be made to be cautious about the above concerns.

Infection can be explained as the K-wires were left outside the skin and this may have led to pin site infection. The strengths of present study are the low rate of patients lost to follow-up, and the relatively homogeneous patient material (only neck and shaft fractures, two widely used and similar operative techniques).

Limitation(s)

The weakness of present study was a small sample size and a short follow-up period. It is advised for further studies with a larger sample size, a longer follow-up and better statistical tools to analyse the results.

Conclusion

Both antegrade intramedullary pinning and transverse pinning are minimally invasive techniques with the advantage of early postoperative rehabilitation and clinical, functional, and radiological recovery. Although similar results were obtained with both techniques when assessed in terms of clinical and radiological recovery, the functional recovery however in terms of the final range of motion achieved as per ASSH TAM score was found to be superior with antegrade intramedullary pinning.

References

1.
Mirza A, Mirza J, Healy C, Mathew V, Lee B. Radiographic and clinical assessment of intramedullary nail fixation for the treatment of unstable metacarpal fractures. Hand (N Y). 2018;13(2):184-89. [crossref] [PubMed]
2.
Nakashian MN, Pointer L, Owens BD, Wolf JM. Incidence of metacarpal fractures in the US population. Hand (N Y). 2012;7(4):426-30. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
De Jonge JJ, Kingma J, van der Lei B, Klasen HJ. Fractures of the metacarpals. A retrospective analysis of incidence and aetiology and a review of the English-language literature. Injury. 1994;25(6):365-69. [crossref] [PubMed]
4.
Gupta R, Singh R, Siwach R, Sangwan S, Magu NK, Diwan R, et al. Evaluation of surgical stabilization of metacarpal and phalangeal fractures of hand. Indian J Orthop. 2007;41(3):224-29. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
van Bussel EM, Houwert RM, Kootstra TJM, van Heijl M, Van der Velde D, Wittich Ph, et al. Antegrade intramedullary Kirschner-wire fixation of displaced metacarpal shaft fractures. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2019;45(1):65-71. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
McNemar TB, Howell J, Chang E. Management of metacarpal fractures. J Hand Ther. 2003;16(2):143-51. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Kamath JB, Harshvardhan, Naik DM, Bansal A. Current concepts in managing fractures of metacarpal and phalangess. Indian J Plastic Sur. 2011;44(2):203-11. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Galal S, Safwat W. Transverse pinning versus intramedullary pinning in fifth metacarpal’s neck fractures: A randomized controlled study with patient-reported outcome. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2017;8(4):339-43. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Ben-Amotz O, Sammer DM. Practical management of metacarpal fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;136(3):370e-79e. [crossref] [PubMed]
10.
Haughton DN, Jordan D, Malahias M, Hindocha S, Khan W. Principles of hand fracture management. Open Orthop J. 2012;6(1):43-53. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Capo JT, Gottschalk MB, Streubel PN, Rizzo M. Hand Fractures and Dislocations. In: Tornetta III P, Ricci WM, Ostrum RF, McQueen MM, Mckee MD, Brown CMC. Rockwood and Green’s Fractures in adults. 9th edition. Philadelphia: Woters Kluwer; 2020. page 1746.
12.
Kollitz KM, Hammert WC, Vedder NB, Huang JI. Metacarpal fractures: Treatment and complications. Hand (N Y). 2014;9(1):16-23. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Berkman EF, Miles GH. Internal fixation of metacarpal fractures exclusive of the thumb. J Bone Joint Surg. 1943;24(4):816-21.
14.
Potenza V, Caterini R, De Maio F, Bisicchia S, Farsetti P. Fractures of the neck of the fifth metacarpal bone. Medium-term results in 28 cases treated by percutaneous transverse pinning. Injury. 2012;43(2):242-45. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Foucher G. ‘Bouquet’ osteosynthesis in metacarpal neck fractures: A series of 66 patients. J Hand Surg Am. 1995;20(3 Pt 2):S86-90. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Kim CH, Kim DH, Kang HV, Kim WJ, Shin M, Kim JW. Factors affecting healing following percutaneous intramedullary fixation of metacarpal fractures. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100(50):e27968. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Winter M, Balaguer T, Bessière C, Carles M, Lebreton E. Surgical treatment of the boxer’s fracture: Transverse pinning versus intramedullary pinning. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2007;32(6):709-13. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Diaz-Garcia R, Waljee JF. Current management of metacarpal fractures. Hand Clinics. 2013;29(4):507-18. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Safadi S, Al-Qattan M. Foucher’s antegrade intramedullary fixation of fractures of the fifth metacarpal. Canadian Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1997;5(4):238-40. [crossref]
20.
Tubina R, Thomine JM, Mackin E. Examination of Hand and wrist. Boca Raton: CRC press; 1998. page 207. [crossref]
21.
Abdelhady HH, Zayed, FH, Salah M. Functional results of osteosynthesis with mini-plate and screws in metacarpal shaft fractures. Al-Azhar Int Med J. 2020;1(6): 280-83. Doi: 10.21608/aimj.2020.30159.1226. [crossref]
22.
Heller GZ, Manuguerra M, Chow R. How to analyze the visual analogue scale: Myths, truths and clinical relevance. Scandinavian Journal of Pain. 2016;13(1):67-75. [crossref] [PubMed]
23.
Gudmundsen TE, Borgen L. Fractures of the fifth metacarpal. Acta Radiol. 2009;50(3):296-300. [crossref] [PubMed]
24.
Wong TC, Ip FK, Yeung SH.Comparison between percutaneous transverse fixation and intramedullary K-wires in treating closed fractures of the metacarpal neck of the little finger. Journal of Hand Surgery. 2006;31(1):61-65. [crossref] [PubMed]
25.
Sletten IN, Nordsletten L, Husby T, Ødegaard RA, Hellund JC, Kvernmo HD, et al. Isolated, extra-articular neck and shaft fractures of the 4th and 5th metacarpals: A comparison of transverse and bouquet (intra-medullary) pinning in 67 patients. J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2012;37(5):387-95. [crossref] [PubMed]
26.
Moon SJ, Yang JW, Roh SY, Lee DC, Kim JS. Comparison between intramedullary nailing and percutaneous K-wire fixation for fractures in the distal third of the metacarpal bone. Archives of Plastic Surgery. 2014;41(6):768-72. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/56686.16739

Date of Submission: Mar 27, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Apr 27, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Jun 09, 2022
Date of Publishing: Aug 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Apr 05, 2022
• Manual Googling: Jun 07, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Jun 14, 2022 (10%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com