Osteotomias de encurtamento da ulna: A nossa experiência

Cardoso, Afonso; Viegas, Rui; Gamelas, Patrícia; Falcão, Pedro; Baptista, Carolina; Silva, Filipa Santos

doi:10.1055/s-0040-1702959

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(79 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies have reported that this procedure could relieve pain, and improve grip strength and wrist functional scores [ 35 – 37 ]. However, the procedure is plagued by multiple complications [ 38 ]. In addition, USO is not suitable for patients with a reverse oblique inclination of the DRUJ due to the resultant joint incongruity [ 39 , 40 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arthroscopic wafer procedure versus ulnar shortening osteotomy for ulnar impaction syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Shi,

Huang,

Shen

et al. 2024

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aimed to systematically compare the efficacy and safety of arthroscopic wafer procedure (AWP) versus ulnar shortening osteotomy (USO) for ulnar impaction syndrome (UIS) treatment. Methods All the studies included in this meta-analysis compared the efficacy of AWP to USO for UIS and were acquired through a comprehensive search across multiple databases. The meta-analysis was performed by calculating the effect sizes with the Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 5.4 software. Results A total of 8 articles were included in this analysis, comprising 148 cases in the AWP group and 163 cases in the USO group. The pooled estimates indicated no significant differences in combined Darrow’s Criteria or Modified Mayo Wrist Score, Modified Mayo Wrist Score, DASH scores, grip strength, VAS score, and postoperative ulnar variation. On the other hand, the patients in the AWP group exhibited fewer complications (OR = 0.17, 95%CI 0.05–0.54, P = 0.003) and a lower reoperation rate (OR = 0.12, 95%CI 0.05–0.28, P < 0.00001) than those in the USO group. Conclusions The two surgical techniques were both effective in treating UIS but the AWP group showed fewer complications and a lower reoperation rate. Therefore, AWP may present a superior alternative for UIS treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arthroscopic wafer procedure versus ulnar shortening osteotomy for ulnar impaction syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Shi,

Huang,

Shen

et al. 2024

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is noteworthy that wrist ulnar pressure also increases during activities such as pronation, fist clenching, and ulnar deviation. 13 A retrospective case study revealed an average ulnar-positive variance of 2 mm during pronation, 14 providing insights into the pathogenesis of UIS in cases without ulnar variance in static anteroposterior X-ray view.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Ulnar Impaction Syndrome (2024)

Xu,

Ho,

Nakamura

et al. 2024

J Wrist Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Ulnar impaction syndrome (UIS), also known as ulnar impaction or ulnar abutment, is a degenerative condition causing pain on the ulnar side of the wrist. It can lead to wrist bone necrosis, resulting in wrist joint stability disruption and a significant wrist function impairment. The global understanding of this condition varies, contributing to substantial differences in clinical outcomes. Purposes: This paper underscores the necessity of developing evidence-based clinical guidelines for UIS to guide clinicians in their diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Methods: In collaboration with the Asian Pacific Wrist Association, a team of experts from various fields within the Hand Surgery Department at Huashan Hospital has collectively formulated the “Clinical Practice Guidelines for Ulnar Impaction Syndrome (2024)” (hereinafter referred to as the “Guidelines”). The development process adhered to the guidelines outlined in the World Health Organization's handbook for guideline development. Results: Ten key questions and 21 recommendations are formed. The Guidelines provide recommendations for UIS diagnosis, criteria for selecting conservative or surgical interventions, options for surgical procedures, and address various related issues. Conclusions: The collaborative effort aims to standardize clinical practices, enhance diagnostic accuracy, and improve treatment outcomes for individuals affected by UIS, with these recommendations intended to serve as a valuable reference for healthcare professionals.

show abstract

Osteotomias de encurtamento da ulna: A nossa experiência

Cited by 2 publications

References 29 publications

Arthroscopic wafer procedure versus ulnar shortening osteotomy for ulnar impaction syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Arthroscopic wafer procedure versus ulnar shortening osteotomy for ulnar impaction syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Ulnar Impaction Syndrome (2024)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About