Download PDF
J Hand Microsurg 2023; 15(05): 376-387
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1749410
Survey/Meta-Analysis

Intramedullary K-wires versus Alternate Techniques for Metacarpal Shaft and Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Terence L. Thomas
1   Department of Orthopaedics, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Amir R. Kachooei 
2   Department of Hand and Wrist, Rothman Orthopedic Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Asif M. Ilyas
2   Department of Hand and Wrist, Rothman Orthopedic Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Intramedullary K-wire (IMKW) fixation is one of the mainstays for surgically treating metacarpal shaft and neck fractures. However, there remains a lack of literature comparing outcomes of the various available surgical repair techniques in all indicated metacarpals. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the clinical advantages and drawbacks of IMKW compared with alternate fracture repair techniques. A comprehensive systematic literature review was performed to identify studies that compared clinical outcomes of IMKW to alternate metacarpal fixation modalities. Outcomes included Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH/quickDASH) scores, grip strength, union rate, visual analog scale pain, operative time, and complications. A random-effects model was used to compare IMKW to the pooled effect of other fixation techniques. A total of 10 studies were included in our analysis, comprising 497 metacarpal fractures (220 shafts and 277 necks). IMKW fixation was identified as the control group in all studies. The pooled experimental group included plates, transverse K-wires (TKWs), interfragmentary screws (IFSs), and K-wire cross-pinning (CP). In treating metacarpal shaft fractures, IMKW showed significantly shorter operative time (p = 0.04; mean difference = − 13; 95% confidence interval = −26 to −0.64). No significant differences were observed in treating metacarpal neck fractures for disability, grip strength, healing rate, pain, operative time, or complication rate. This systematic review and meta-analysis found no difference in clinical outcomes among various surgical techniques for treating metacarpal shaft and neck fractures. Further high evidence studies are required that investigate the efficacy and safety of IFS, CP, TKW, and intramedullary screws versus IMKW for treating closed, unstable metacarpal fractures.

Keywords

fixation techniques - fracture - hand fracture - intramedullary - meta-analysis - metacarpal - metacarpal fracture - surgery - surgical - systematic review


Publication History

Article published online:
01 July 2022

© 2022. Society of Indian Hand Surgery & Microsurgeons. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Nakashian MN, Pointer L, Owens BD, Wolf JM. Incidence of metacarpal fractures in the US population. Hand (N Y) 2012; 7 (04) 426-430
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Cheah AE, Yao J. Hand fractures: indications, the tried and true and new innovations. J Hand Surg Am 2016; 41 (06) 712-722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Karl JW, Olson PR, Rosenwasser MP. The epidemiology of upper extremity fractures in the United States, 2009. J Orthop Trauma 2015; 29 (08) e242-e244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Diaz-Garcia R, Waljee JF. Current management of metacarpal fractures. Hand Clin 2013; 29 (04) 507-518
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Meals C, Meals R. Hand fractures: a review of current treatment strategies. J Hand Surg Am 2013; 38 (05) 1021-1031 , quiz 1031
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Ozer K, Gillani S, Williams A, Peterson SL, Morgan S. Comparison of intramedullary nailing versus plate-screw fixation of extra-articular metacarpal fractures. J Hand Surg Am 2008; 33 (10) 1724-1731
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Rhee SH, Lee SK, Lee SL, Kim J, Baek GH, Lee YH. Prospective multicenter trial of modified retrograde percutaneous intramedullary Kirschner wire fixation for displaced metacarpal neck and shaft fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 129 (03) 694-703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Chong HH, Hau MY, Shah R, Singh H. Management of little finger metacarpal fractures: a meta-analysis of the current evidence. J Hand Surg Asian Pac Vol 2020; 25 (03) 281-290
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Yammine K, Harvey A. Antegrade intramedullary nailing for fifth metacarpal neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2014; 24 (03) 273-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Zong SL, Zhao G, Su LX. et al. Treatments for the fifth metacarpal neck fractures: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016; 95 (11) e3059
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6 (07) e1000097
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ. et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019; 366: l4898
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC. et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016; 355: i4919
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 McGuinness LA, Higgins JPT. Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods 2021; 12 (01) 55-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wan X, Wang W, Liu J, Tong T. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014; 14: 135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Weir CJ, Butcher I, Assi V. et al. Dealing with missing standard deviation and mean values in meta-analysis of continuous outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2018; 18 (01) 25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005; 5: 13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Biz C, Iacobellis C. Comparison of percutaneous intramedullary Kirschner wire and interfragmentary screw fixation of displaced extra-articular metacarpal fractures. Acta Biomed 2014; 85 (03) 252-264
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Cha SM, Shin HD, Kim YK. Comparison of low-profile locking plate fixation versus antegrade intramedullary nailing for unstable metacarpal shaft fractures–a prospective comparative study. Injury 2019; 50 (12) 2252-2258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Chen KJ, Wang JP, Yin CY, Huang HK, Chang MC, Huang YC. Fixation of fifth metacarpal neck fractures: a comparison of medial locking plates with intramedullary K-wires. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2020; 45 (06) 567-573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Dreyfuss D, Allon R, Izacson N, Hutt D. A comparison of locking plates and intramedullary pinning for fixation of metacarpal shaft fractures. Hand (N Y) 2019; 14 (01) 27-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Facca S, Ramdhian R, Pelissier A, Diaconu M, Liverneaux P. Fifth metacarpal neck fracture fixation: locking plate versus K-wire?. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2010; 96 (05) 506-512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 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 (04) 339-343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Pasquino A, Tomarchio A, De Cruto E. et al. Comparing hand strength and quality life of locking plate versus intramedullary k wire for transverse midshaft metacarpal fractures. Med Glas (Zenica) 2021; 18 (01) 316-321
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Schädel-Höpfner M, Wild M, Windolf J, Linhart W. Antegrade intramedullary splinting or percutaneous retrograde crossed pinning for displaced neck fractures of the fifth metacarpal?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2007; 127 (06) 435-440
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 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 (06) 709-713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 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. J Hand Surg [Br] 2006; 31 (01) 61-65
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Corkum JP, Davison PG, Lalonde DH. Systematic review of the best evidence in intramedullary fixation for metacarpal fractures. Hand (N Y) 2013; 8 (03) 253-260
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Zhu X, Zhang H, Wu J, Wang S, Miao L. Pin vs plate fixation for metacarpal fractures: a meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 2020; 15 (01) 542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Melamed E, Joo L, Lin E, Perretta D, Capo JT. Plate fixation versus percutaneous pinning for unstable metacarpal fractures: a meta-analysis. J Hand Surg Asian Pac Vol 2017; 22 (01) 29-34
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Esteban-Feliu I, Gallardo-Calero I, Barrera-Ochoa S, Lluch-Bergadà A, Alabau-Rodriguez S, Mir-Bulló X. Analysis of 3 different operative techniques for extra-articular fractures of the phalanges and metacarpals. Hand (N Y) 2021; 16 (05) 595-603
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Wang D, Sun K, Jiang W. Mini-plate versus Kirschner wire internal fixation for treatment of metacarpal and phalangeal fractures. J Int Med Res 2020; 48 (03) 300060519887264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Lv F, Nie Q, Guo J, Tang M. Comparative analysis of the effects of AO mini-plate and Kirschner wire pinning in the metacarpal fractures: A retrospective study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2021; 100 (26) e26566
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 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. Arch Plast Surg 2014; 41 (06) 768-772
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Sletten IN, Nordsletten L, Husby T, Ødegaard RA, Hellund JC, Kvernmo HD. 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 (05) 387-395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Galanakis I, Aligizakis A, Katonis P, Papadokostakis G, Stergiopoulos K, Hadjipavlou A. Treatment of closed unstable metacarpal fractures using percutaneous transverse fixation with Kirschner wires. J Trauma 2003; 55 (03) 509-513
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Green DP, Anderson JR. Closed reduction and percutaneous pin fixation of fractured phalanges. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1973; 55 (08) 1651-1654
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Haughton D, Jordan D, Malahias M, Hindocha S, Khan W. Principles of hand fracture management. Open Orthop J 2012; 6: 43-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Liporace FA, Kinchelow T, Gupta S, Kubiak EN, McDonnell M. Minifragment screw fixation of oblique metacarpal fractures: a biomechanical analysis of screw types and techniques. Hand (N Y) 2008; 3 (04) 311-315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Roth JJ, Auerbach DM. Fixation of hand fractures with bicortical screws. J Hand Surg Am 2005; 30 (01) 151-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Belsky MR, Eaton RG, Lane LB. Closed reduction and internal fixation of proximal phalangeal fractures. J Hand Surg Am 1984; 9 (05) 725-729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Faruqui S, Stern PJ, Kiefhaber TR. Percutaneous pinning of fractures in the proximal third of the proximal phalanx: complications and outcomes. J Hand Surg Am 2012; 37 (07) 1342-1348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Edwards Jr GS, O'Brien ET, Heckman MM. Retrograde cross-pinning of transverse metacarpal and phalangeal fractures. Hand 1982; 14 (02) 141-148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Akinleye SD, Garofolo-Gonzalez G, Culbertson MD, Choueka J. Iatrogenic injuries in percutaneous pinning techniques for fifth metacarpal neck fractures. Hand (N Y) 2019; 14 (03) 386-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Couceiro J, Ayala H, Sanchez M, De la Red MLA, Velez O, Del Canto F. Intramedullary screws versus Kirschner wires for metacarpal fixation, functional, and patient-related outcomes. Surg J (NY) 2018; 4 (01) e29-e33
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Boulton CL, Salzler M, Mudgal CS. Intramedullary cannulated headless screw fixation of a comminuted subcapital metacarpal fracture: case report. J Hand Surg Am 2010; 35 (08) 1260-1263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Eisenberg G, Clain JB, Feinberg-Zadek N, Leibman M, Belsky M, Ruchelsman DE. Clinical outcomes of limited open intramedullary headless screw fixation of metacarpal fractures in 91 consecutive patients. Hand (N Y) 2020; 15 (06) 793-797
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Ruchelsman DE, Puri S, Feinberg-Zadek N, Leibman MI, Belsky MR. Clinical outcomes of limited-open retrograde intramedullary headless screw fixation of metacarpal fractures. J Hand Surg Am 2014; 39 (12) 2390-2395
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Dyrna FGE, Avery III DM, Yoshida R. et al. Metacarpal shaft fixation: a biomechanical comparison of dorsal plating, lag screws, and headless compression screws. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2021; 22 (01) 335
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Warrender WJ, Ruchelsman DE, Livesey MG, Mudgal CS, Rivlin M. Low rate of complications following intramedullary headless compression screw fixation of metacarpal fractures. Hand (N Y) 2020; 15 (06) 798-804
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 ten Berg PW, Mudgal CS, Leibman MI, Belsky MR, Ruchelsman DE. Quantitative 3-dimensional CT analyses of intramedullary headless screw fixation for metacarpal neck fractures. J Hand Surg Am 2013; 38 (02) 322-330.e2
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar