• Giuseppe Solarino, Giovanni Vicenti, Antonella Abate, Massimiliano Carrozzo, Girolamo Picca, Antonio Colella, and Biagio Moretti.
• Department of Neuroscience and Organs of Sense, Orthopaedics Section, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Bari, Bari, Italy.
• Injury. 2016 Oct 1; 47 Suppl 4: S84-S90.

PurposeTo compare clinical outcomes of ORIF with volar locking plates and the Epibloc system (ES) in the treatment of distal radius fractures (DRFs) in patients aged over 65 years.MethodsWe retrospectively examined a consecutive series of 100 patients with intra-articular or extra-articular DRF who were admitted to our Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology between January 2007 and January 2013. Fifty patients were treated using the Epibloc System; and the other 50 patients using ORIF with volar locking plates. In all patients, functional evaluation (wrist range of motion [ROM], grip strength and Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] Score) and radiographic assessment (radial inclination, volar tilt, ulnar variance and articular congruity) were performed at 2 and 6 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively; then every 12 months thereafter.ResultsORIF with volar locking plates was associated with better outcome than ES in the intra-articular and extra-articular DRF groups, generating higher average ROM, DASH and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Grip strength mean values, however, were quantified over the minimum level for a functional wrist (>60%) in both groups. There were no differences between the two techniques in X-ray parameters, and no further correlation was found with functional outcome and ROM.ConclusionsIn a low-functioning patient with multiple medical comorbidities, minimally-invasive surgery with the ES is a safe option, enables early mobilisation of the wrist and is likely to produce acceptable clinical outcomes.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

36 keywords...

hide…