Up until a few decades ago, distal radius fractures were often casually regarded as ‘Colles’ fractures’. The treatment was mainly manipulation and casting, since the generally accepted concept proposed by Abraham Colles in 18141, was that although these fractures would heal with deformity, the functional deficit would be acceptable. With better understanding of the various fracture types, classifications such as Frykman,2 Melone3 and AO4 were developed. There was a need for a better method of treatment after careful study of the individual fracture pattern. Moreover, the need for better outcomes in these fractures has frequently been revisited as newer methods of treatment have been developed. Fracture union is no longer the only goal, as the restoration of normal anatomy with early functional recovery, as well as resultant full and painless motion of the wrist, take over as the ultimate goals of treatment.
Factors affecting choice of management
• Patients aged > 65 years were more likely to suffer from secondary displacement5
• Risk of failure to maintain reduction was four times higher in patients > 60 years6
• Independent predictor of late instability and malunion7
• However, older patients are also more tolerant of radiological malalignment, and functional outcome may not correlate with restoration of anatomy8
• Work-related injuries
• Injury compensation is a predictor of pain and disability11
• Less likely to return to work12
Some fracture patterns are more likely to result in significant deformities leading to worse functional outcomes.13-18 Predictors of instability and redisplacement after manipulation include:
• Initial displacement (lateral displacement > 1cm or radial shortening > 5 mm)
• Presence of metaphyseal comminution
• Intra-articular fractures with articular incongruity (step off > 2 mm)
• Associated distal ulnar fractures
Non-operative treatment (closed reduction and casting)
• Undisplaced fractures
• Well reduced stable fractures
• Old age, low functional demand
• Cumbersome cast or splint
• Adjacent joint stiffness
• Loss of reduction more common than surgically treated fractures19
• Median nerve neuropathies
• Cast impingement and compartment syndrome
Closed reduction and casting can be performed in many cases when the fractures are stable after reduction or are minimally displaced. The reduction is based on the principle of ligamentotaxis. The deformity is exaggerated, the mechanism of injury is reversed and a plaster cast is applied to keep the fracture in a reduced position using a three-point fixation principle. No control can be expected for intra-articular fragments without any capsular attachment. The subsequent decision for surgical intervention is based on the surgeon’s analysis of the quality of the closed reduction and the likelihood of redisplacement.
There is a general consensus that in young and functional patients, more efforts should be placed into restoring the anatomy of the wrist joint and allowing early motion. The tolerance to fracture displacement in casting is therefore less. For elderly patients, recent prospective randomised studies have shown that non-operative treatment may yield better than expected functional results.20-23 In the long-term, malunion and radiological arthritis do not essentially mean more significant symptoms.
Overall, there is not enough evidence to conclude whether cast immobilisation or surgical fixation provide a better functional outcome. Currently a randomised multicentre clinical trial is being conducted in Germany which may give us more evidence.24
The decision to adopt surgical treatment often depends on timely identification of those at risk of having poor outcome after closed reduction and casting. Some insights can be gained from patient factors and fracture characteristics mentioned above. A CT scan is invaluable in assessing the configuration of intra-articular fractures.
Due to a lack of universal consensus, it is difficult to outline a general guideline in treating all distal radius fractures. Various methods of surgical treatment are described and many randomised trials can be found throughout medical literature. The best treatment method should restore and maintain anatomy, allow early mobilisation and have minimal risk of complication. Each surgical method has pros and cons and the surgeon should choose the appropriate method for individual fractures according to one’s surgical expertise.
• Unstable fractures
• Intra-articular fractures
• Fractures irreducible by closed means
• Delayed fixation
• Preference for earlier mobilisation
• Unsightly scar
• Tendon rupture (flexor or extensor)
• Some patients may require implant removal
• Implant cost
• Technically more difficult than other surgical methods
There is an increasing popularity towards open reduction and plate fixation. After restoring the anatomy of the articular surface, a sufficiently stable construct also allows for early mobilisation.
Angular stable ‘locking implants’ were first introduced a decade ago. They achieved significantly improved mechanical stability in fracture fixation when compared with non-locking implants.25 A few randomised control trials since then have shown that open reduction and internal fixation with locking implants were usually superior to both external fixation26-28 and percutaneous pinning,29,30 with regard to radiological results, early functional results, and complication rates. Many of the studies, however, had difficulty proving advantages in long-term outcome after one year. It is worth noting that studies using older generation non-locking implants31-34 have not produced similarly superior results when compared with external fixation, pinning or casting.
A volar approach is usually recommended for plating in most fracture types. There is better soft-tissue coverage and less tendon irritation. Jakubietz et al35 have shown that routine volar plating was associated with significantly better range of motion, grip strength and pain, when compared with routine dorsal plating. Despite being technically easier, the surgeon must still be familiar with the proper surgical technique of volar plating, and be mindful of potential complications that may arise36:
• Extensor tendon injury or rupture
• Flexor tendon irritation or rupture
• Carpal tunnel syndrome
• Complex regional pain syndrome
• Loss of reduction
• Hardware failure
A dorsal approach and dorsal plate fixation may be required in some cases when a volar approach alone cannot achieve anatomical articular reduction and stable fixation. A careful CT evaluation of the fracture pattern before surgery is therefore recommended to determine whether a dorsal approach would be necessary. Some surgeons recommend routine removal of dorsal implants due to a higher rate of tendon attrition rupture37 and a more significant improvement in function after dorsal implant removal relative to volar implant removal.
• Unstable fractures
• Highly comminuted intra-articular fractures
• Poor soft-tissue conditions including open fractures
• Adjunct to internal fixation or pinning
• Cumbersome external frame compared with internal fixation
• Pin-tract infections (14%)
• Tendons and sensory radial nerve injury
The fracture is immobilised for six to eight weeks with the fixator depending on fracture pattern and healing. Different techniques of external fixation are described below.
A bridging external fixator device spanning the wrist joint is usually placed dorsally or radially with threaded pins inserted into the metacarpal bone and the shaft of radius. The wrist joint and the fracture site are immobilised. Fracture reduction is maintained by the principle of ligamentotaxis. However, over distraction should be avoided to prevent excessive pain and finger stiffness with resultant poor functional results.
A non-bridging external fixator can also be used with pins placed into a relatively sizable distal radius fragment. This allows for more direct fixation without ligamentotaxis. Early mobilisation of the wrist joint is also possible. Studied have shown improved radiological outcome but mixed clinical outcomes,38-39 a systematic review40 of nine trials with 510 patients found no robust evidence to conclude that it is superior to the bridging method.
Dynamic hinged external fixation allows early motion of the wrist joint. It is technically demanding and not widely available. Studies have shown that patients can regain of range of motion earlier,41,42 but at increased risk of pin-tract infections. There was no significant difference in eventual clinical outcome.
Randomised clinical trials31,43 and a large systematic review44 comparing all methods of external fixation versus conservative treatment concluded that external fixation yielded better radiological results. There was some suggestion of improved clinical outcomes, and less secondary surgery. External fixation was also associated with higher rate of minor complications but similar rate of serious complications such as reflex sympathetic dystrophy.
Closed reduction with percutaneous pinning
• Unstable fractures without significant comminution
• Additional casting or external fixator often needed
• Pin-tract infections
• Tendon and superficial radial nerve impalement
• Loss of reduction more likely when compared with plating
Kirschner wires are percutaneous placed to stabilise fracture fragments before the wrist is further immobilised with a cast or external fixator. This permits direct fixation of major fragments in addition to ligamentotaxis. Surgical incision is minimal and implants are economical. The pins are removed percutaneously after a few weeks when healing becomes evident.
Randomised trials45-47 and a systematic review48 showed that percutaneous pinning across fractures was associated with improved anatomical outcome and minor complications compared with casting. The improved radiological outcomes did not necessarily translate to improved functional outcomes.
Extra-focal pinning means that Kirchner wires are plated through the fracture site, directly stabilising the fragments. This differs from intra-focal pinning where Kirschner wires are placed into the fracture site and the fragments are stabilised by a combination of mechanical block and soft-tissue pull.
Metal pins are recommended, as biodegradable pins were shown to be associated with more complications.27 Pin-tract infection is usually self-limiting. This can be reduced from 20% to 4% according to Hargreaves et al,49 by burying pins within the skin. However this means that further surgery will be required for removal.
Surgeons may elect to use bone graft or artificial bone substitutes during surgical treatment. This addresses significant bone defects resulting from fracture impaction, delayed surgical treatment and osteoporosis. Filling the bone defect can improve the rate of union, provide short term mechanical support and prevent loss of fixation.
While complications at the fracture site are rare, routine use of bone graft or substitutes is unnecessary. Artificial bone substitutes are expensive and significant donor site morbidity occasionally results from autologous bone graft harvesting. There was mixed outcome from clinical studies regarding routine use of these methods.50-57 Most reported improved radiological outcome but there has been no significant evidence to show that the functional outcome is also improved.
Fracture healing may be slightly speeded up by alternating electric current stimulation58 and teriparatide injection.59 These effects are noted to be small and the results have yet to be confirmed by larger trials.
Rehabilitation and follow-up
Rehabilitative exercise of the wrist is mandatory as with treatment of other fractures. Studies60-63 have shown favourable outcomes when a systematic regimen of exercises are routinely introduced during the early stage of treatment. Alternatively, when instructed a detailed and specific self-exercise regimen by the surgeon, compliant patients may also expect results comparable to formal rehabilitative training.61,62 Early mobilisation goes hand in hand with stable fixation. The wrist joint can tolerate immediate range of motion exercise after internal fixation.60 Strengthening exercises are started when fracture union becomes more solid. Loss of reduction usually occurs within the first month, and early follow-ups with radiological assessment are necessary to monitor progress and detect complications.
Assessment of outcomes
The treatment outcomes of distal radius fractures have all along been evaluated by objective measurements such as grip strength and motion as well as radiographic parameters. Recently, there is an increasing demand to adopt patients’ subjective evaluation tools12,64 such as DASH and PRWE. How the deformity, objective functional outcome and subjective patient satisfaction affect one another remains a conundrum. The standard practice and general consensus is still highly variable between different countries. The decision for each patient should be based on individual needs weighted against the cost and additional risks of surgery.
1. Colles A. On the fracture of the carpal extremity of the radius. Edinb Med Surg J. 1814;10:181. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006;445:5-7.
2. Frykman G. Fracture of the distal radius including sequelae--shoulder-hand-finger syndrome, disturbance in the distal radio-ulnar joint and impairment of nerve function. A clinical and experimental study. Acta Orthop Scand 1967:Suppl 108:3+.
3. Melone CP, Jr. Open treatment for displaced articular fractures of the distal radius. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986-202:103-11.
4. Muller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P. AO Classification of fractures. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1987.
5. Leone J, Bhandari M, Adili A, et al. Predictors of early and late instability following conservative treatment of extra-articular distal radius fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2004;124:38-41.
6. Nesbitt KS, Failla JM, Les C. Assessment of instability factors in adult distal radius fractures. J Hand Surg Am 2004;29:1128-38.
7. Mackenney PJ, McQueen MM, Elton R. Prediction of instability in distal radial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2006;88-A:1944-51.
8. Young BT, Rayan GM. Outcome following nonoperative treatment of displaced distal radius fractures in low-demand patients older than 60 years. J Hand Surg Am 2000;25:19-28.
9. Büyükkurt CD, Bülbül M, Ayanoğlu S, et al. The effects of osteoporosis on functional outcome in patients with distal radius fracture treated with plate osteosynthesis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2012;46:89-95.
10. Hollevoet N, Verdonk R. Outcome of distal radius fractures in relation to bone mineral density. Acta Orthop Belg 2003;69:510-14.
11. MacDermid JC, Donner A, Richards RS, Roth JH. Patient versus injury factors as predictors of pain and disability six months after a distal radius fracture. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:849-54.
12. Fernandez JJ, Gruen GS, Herndon JH. Outcome of distal radius fractures using the short form 36 health survey. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997;341:36-41.
13. Karnezis IA, Panagiotopoulos E, Tyllianakis M, Megas P, Lambiris E. Correlation between radiological parameters and patient-rated wrist dysfunction following fractures of the distal radius. Injury 2005;36:1435-9.
14. Lafontaine M, Hardy D, Delince P. Stability assessment of distal radius fractures. Injury 1989;20:208-10.
15. Geissler WB, Fernandez DL, Lamey DM. Distal radioulnar joint injuries associated with fractures of the distal radius. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996;327:135-46.
16. Lindau T, Arner M, Hagberg L. Intraarticular lesions in distal fractures of the radius in young adults: a descriptive arthroscopic study in 50 patients. J Hand Surg Br 1997;22:638-43.
17. Missakian ML, Cooney WP, Amadio PC, Glidewell HL. Open reduction and internal fixation for distal radius fractures. J Hand Surg Am 1992;17:745-55.
18. Ng CY, McQueen MM. What are the radiological predictors of functional outcome following fractures of the distal radius? J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2011;93-B:145-50.
19. Altissimi M, Antenucci R, Fiacca C, Mancini GB. Long-term results of conservative treatment of fractures of the distal radius. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986;206:202-10.
20. Földhazy Z, Törnkvist H, Elmstedt E, et al. Long-term outcome of nonsurgically treated distal radius fractures. J Hand Surg Am 2007;32:1374-84.
21. Arora R, Lutz M, Deml C, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing nonoperative treatment with volar locking plate fixation for displaced and unstable distal radial fractures in patients sixty-five years of age and older. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2011;93-A:2146-53.
22. Egol KA, Walsh M, Romo-Cardoso S, Dorsky S, Paksima N. Distal radial fractures in the elderly: operative compared with nonoperative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2010;92-A:1851-7.
23. Kreder HJ, Agel J, McKee MD, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of distal radius fractures with metaphyseal displacement but without joint incongruity: closed reduction and casting versus closed reduction, spanning external fixation, and optional percutaneous K-wires. J Orthop Trauma 2006;20:115
24. Bartl C, Stengel D, Bruckner T, et al. Open reduction and internal fixation versus casting for highly comminuted and intra-articular fractures of the distal radius (ORCHID): protocol for a randomized clinical multi-center trial. Trials 2011;12:84-84.
25. Leung F, Zhu L, Ho H, Lu WW, Chow SP. Palmar plate fixation of AO type C2 fracture of distal radius using a locking compression plate: a biomechanical study in a cadaveric model. J Hand Surg Br 2003;28:263-6.
26. Leung F, Tu YK, Chew WY, Chow SP. Comparison of external and percutaneous pin fixation with plate fixation for intra-articular distal radial fractures: a randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008;90:16-22.
27. Egol K, Walsh M, Tejwani N, et al. Bridging external fixation and supplementary Kirschner-wire fixation versus volar locked plating for unstable fractures of the distal radius: a randomised, prospective trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2008;90-B:1214-21.
28. Wei DH, Raizman NM, Bottino CJ, et al. Unstable distal radial fractures treated with external fixation, a radial column plate, or a volar plate: a prospective randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2009;91-A:1568-77.
29. Marcheix PS, Dotzis A, Benko PE, et al. Extension fractures of the distal radius in patients older than 50: a prospective randomized study comparing fixation using mixed pins or a palmar fixed-angle plate. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2010;35:646-51.
30. Rozental TD, Blazar PE, Franko OI, Chacko AT, Earp BE, Day CS. Functional outcomes for unstable distal radial fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation or closed reduction and percutaneous fixation: a prospective randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2009;91-A:1837-46.
31. Kreder HJ, Hanel DP, Agel J, et al. Indirect reduction and percutaneous fixation versus open reduction and internal fixation for displaced intra-articular fractures of the distal radius: a randomised, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2005;87-B:829-36.
32. Xu GG, Chan SP, Puhaindran ME, Chew WY. Prospective randomised study of intra-articular fractures of the distal radius: comparison between external fixation and plate fixation. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2009;38:600-6.
33. Kapoor H, Agarwal A, Dhaon BK. Displaced intra-articular fractures of distal radius: a comparative evaluation of results following closed reduction, external fixation and open reduction with internal fixation. Injury 2000;31:75-9.
34. Handoll HH, Madhok R. Surgical interventions for treating distal radial fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;3:CD003209.
35. Jakubietz RG, Gruenert JG, Kloss DF, Schindele S, Jakubietz MG. A randomised clinical study comparing palmar and dorsal fixed-angle plates for the internal fixation of AO C-type fractures of the distal radius in the elderly. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2008;33:600-4.
36. Berglund LM, Messer TM. Complications of volar plate fixation for managing distal radius fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2009;17:369-77.
37. Grewal R, Perey B, Wilmink M, Stothers K. A randomized prospective study on the treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures: open reduction and internal fixation with dorsal plating versus mini open reduction, percutaneous fixation, and external fixation. J Hand Surg Am 2005;30:764-72.
38. Atroshi I, Brogren E, Larsson GU, et al. Wrist-bridging versus non-bridging external fixation for displaced distal radius fractures: a randomized assessor-blind clinical trial of 38 patients followed for 1 year. Acta Orthop 2006;77:445-53.
39. Krishnan J, Wigg AE, Walker RW, Slavotinek J. Intra-articular fractures of the distal radius: a prospective randomised controlled trial comparing static bridging and dynamic non-bridging external fixation. J Hand Surg Br 2003;28:417-21.
40. Handoll HH, Huntley JS, Madhok R. Different methods of external fixation for treating distal radial fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008;1:CD006522.
41. Hove LM, Krukhaug Y, Revheim K, Helland P, Finsen V. Dynamic compared with static external fixation of unstable fractures of the distal part of the radius: a prospective, randomized multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2010;92-A:1687-96.
42. Krukhaug Y, Ugland S, Lie SA, Hove LM. External fixation of fractures of the distal radius: a randomized comparison of the Hoffman compact II non-bridging fixator and the Dynawrist fixator in 75 patients followed for 1 year. Acta Orthop 2009;80:104-8.
43. Young CF, Nanu AM, Checketts RG. Seven-year outcome following Colles’ type distal radial fracture: a comparison of two treatment methods. J Hand Surg Br 2003;28:422-6.
44. Handoll HH, Huntley JS, Madhok R. External fixation versus conservative treatment for distal radial fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;3:CD006194.
45. Azzopardi T, Ehrendorfer S, Coulton T, Abela M. Unstable extra-articular fractures of the distal radius: a prospective, randomised study of immobilisation in a cast versus supplementary percutaneous pinning. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2005;87-B:837-40.
46. Zyluk A, Janowski P. A comparison of the results of the conservative vs operative by percutaneous Kirschner-wiring treatment of fractures of the distal radius. Chir Narzadow Ruchu Ortop Pol 2007;72:327-34 (in Polish).
47. Wong TC, Chiu Y, Tsang WL, et al. Casting versus percutaneous pinning for extra-articular fractures of the distal radius in an elderly Chinese population: a prospective randomised controlled trial. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2010;35:202-8.
48. Handoll HH, Vaghela MV, Madhok R. Percutaneous pinning for treating distal radial fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;3:CD006080.
49. Hargreaves DG, Drew SJ, Eckersley R. Kirschner wire pin tract infection rates: a randomized controlled trial between percutaneous and buried wires. J Hand Surg Br 2004;29:374-6.
50. Cassidy C, Jupiter JB, Cohen M, et al. Norian SRS cement compared with conventional fixation in distal radial fractures: a randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2003;85-A:2127-37.
51. Jeyam M, Andrew JG, Muir LT, McGovern A. Controlled trial of distal radial fractures treated with a resorbable bone mineral substitute. J Hand Surg Br 2002;27:146-9.
52. Kopylov P, Adalberth K, Jonsson K, Aspenberg P. Norian SRS versus functional treatment in redisplaced distal radial fractures: a randomized study in 20 patients. J Hand Surg Br 2002;27:538-41.
53. Widman J, Isacson J. Primary bone grafting does not improve the results in severely displaced distal radius fractures. Int Orthop 2002;26:20-2.
54. Kopylov P, Aspenberg P, Yuan X, Ryd L. Radiostereometric analysis of distal radial fracture displacement during treatment: a randomized study comparing Norian SRS and external fixation in 23 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 2001;72:57-61.
55. Sanchez-Sotelo J, Munuera L, Madero R. Treatment of fractures of the distal radius with a remodellable bone cement: a prospective, randomised study using Norian SRS. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2000;82-B:856-63.
56. Jakubietz MG, Gruenert JG, Jakubietz RG. The use of beta-tricalcium phosphate bone graft substitute in dorsally plated, comminuted distal radius fractures. J Orthop Surg Res 2011;6:24-24.
57. Kim JK, Koh YD, Kook SH. Effect of calcium phosphate bone cement augmentation on volar plate fixation of unstable distal radial fractures in the elderly. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2011;93-A:609-14.
58. Itoh S, Ohta T, Sekino Y, Yukawa Y, Shinomiya K. Treatment of distal radius fractures with a wrist-bridging external fixation: the value of alternating electric current stimulation. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2008;33:605-8.
59. Aspenberg P, Genant HK, Johansson T, et al. Teriparatide for acceleration of fracture repair in humans: a prospective, randomized, double-blind study of 102 postmenopausal women with distal radial fractures. J Bone Miner Res 2010;25:404-14.
60. Handoll HH, Madhok R, Howe TE. Rehabilitation for distal radial fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;3:CD003324.
61. Souer JS, Buijze G, Ring D. A prospective randomized controlled trial comparing occupational therapy with independent exercises after volar plate fixation of a fracture of the distal part of the radius. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2011;93-A:1761-6.
62. Christensen OM, Kunov A, Hansen FF, Christiansen TC, Krasheninnikoff M. Occupational therapy and Colles’ fractures. Int Orthop 2001;25:43-5.
63. Lozano-Calderón SA, Souer S, Mudgal C, Jupiter JB, Ring D. Wrist mobilization following volar plate fixation of fractures of the distal part of the radius. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2008;90-A:1297-304.
64. Ritting AW, Wolf JM. How to measure outcomes of distal radius fracture treatment. Hand Clin 2012;28:165-75.