Four-Corner Arthrodesis With Differing Methods of Osteosynthesis: A Systematic Review

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the union rates and clinical outcomes of 4-corner arthrodesis with different methods of osteosynthesis. A systematic review of studies published in Ovid, Medline, Embase, and PubMed was conducted. Primary studies that reported clinical and radiographic results following 4-corner arthrodesis for scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC), scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse (SNAC), or other types of wrist arthritis in human subjects were eligible. Biomechanical or cadaveric studies, case reports, studies that did not define and report a radiographic union rate, reviews and technical articles, studies that did not report the method of osteosynthesis, and studies that used multiple methods of osteosynthesis, but did not separate results for individual methods of osteosynthesis were excluded. Radiographic union rate, range of motion, and grip strength were analyzed. We identified and reviewed 291 full texts, selecting 57 studies for coding. The radiographic union rate did not significantly differ between studies using K-wire, screw, staple, nonlocking plate, metal locking plate, and radiolucent locking plate osteosynthesis. Fixation method significantly affected flexion, but pairwise comparison did not reveal any significant differences between individual groups. Grip strength as a percentage of the contralateral limb was significantly lower in studies with metal locking plate fixation compared to K-wire fixation (63.2% vs 82.6%). There were no other statistically significant differences between groups with respect to flexion, extension, radial deviation, ulnar deviation, and grip strength. All methods of osteosynthesis result in similar union rates, with no significant differences between methods. While there are some significant differences in range of motion and grip strength, these differences are unlikely to be clinically relevant. Therapeutic IV.