Surgery versus Conservative Treatment of Distal Radius Fracture in Patients Older Than 85 Years: A Retrospective Study in 94 Cases
|Maxime Barat1*, Laurent Genser1, Malek Tabbara2 and Damien Pourre1|
|1Service d’Orthopédie, Hôpital Simone Veil 14 Rue de Saint-Prix, 95600 Eaubonne, France|
|26 avenues René Fonk, Studio A107, 75019 Paris, France|
|Corresponding Author :||Maxime Barat
Service d’Orthopédie, Hôpital Simone Veil 14 Rue de Saint-Prix
95600 Eaubonne, France
Tel: +331 34 06 61
E-mail: [email protected]
|Received: August 07, 2015; Accepted: August 26, 2015; Published: September 02, 2015|
|Citation: Barat M, Genser L, Tabbara M, Pourre D (2015) Surgery versus Conservative Treatment of Distal Radius Fracture in Patients Older Than 85 Years: A Retrospective Study in 94 Cases. J Osteopor Phys Act 3:156.doi:10.4172/2329- 9509.1000156|
|Copyright: © 2015 Barat M, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.|
|Related article at Pubmed, Scholar Google|
Background: Distal radius fractures are the most common fractures occurring in emergency. There’s no evidence for the superiority of one of the different treatment we can choose, particularly in old patients. The purpose of the present study was to determine if a surgical treatment for DRF in older than 85 is justified and to compare these results to a conservative treatment.
Methods: This is an observational retrospective study that included all patients older than 85 years diagnosed with distal radius fractures and hospitalized in our institution between January 1st, 2010 and June 30th 2013. Patients were divided in 2 groups. The main outcome was the functional result at the end of the patient’s follow up. It was measured objectively with wrist motility and subjectively with the common satisfaction of the patient and the surgeon. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization time, immobilization duration, rate and nature of complications, and the pain at the end of the follow up.
Results: 94 were included, 20 had a conservative treatment, 74 a surgical treatment. Groups were homogeneous at the admission. There were not statistically significant difference in the main outcome with the objective or the subjective evaluation (p=0.046; OR: 0.1729 CI-95% [0.0205; 1.2662]). Immobilization time was significantly longer in the surgical treatment group (42,4 vs. 35,7 days p: 0.045).
Conclusions: Conservative treatment is the best treatment for distal radius fractures in elderly.
Level of Evidence: Level III.