This meta-analysis examined the comparative effectiveness of four treatments for distal radius fractures: volar locking plate (VLP) fixation, percutaneous pinning, splinting, and bracing. The analysis pooled data from 27 studies involving approximately 3200 patients, including randomized controlled trials, prospective cohorts, and retrospective studies. The primary outcomes were functional scores (DASH, PRWE, grip strength), with secondary analysis of complication rates including superficial infection, malunion, nonunion, and delayed union.
For functional outcomes, percutaneous pinning demonstrated significantly better Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) scores than VLP fixation. Percutaneous pinning also showed significantly better functional outcomes than bracing, while VLP fixation yielded significantly better functional outcomes than bracing. No significant differences were found in functional outcomes between VLP fixation and splinting, or between bracing and splinting. Specific effect sizes and absolute numbers for these comparisons were not reported.
Safety analysis revealed that percutaneous pinning was associated with higher rates of superficial infection compared to other treatments. VLP fixation was associated with lower malunion rates than bracing. Serious adverse events, discontinuation rates, and tolerability data were not reported. The authors note substantial heterogeneity in some of the treatment comparisons, which limits the precision of the pooled estimates.
The evidence represents Therapeutic Level II, indicating it comes from meta-analyses of both randomized and non-randomized studies. The practice relevance is that all four treatments achieved acceptable outcomes, but with key trade-offs: percutaneous pinning offered the best functional results but higher infection risk, while VLP provided better function and lower malunion rates than bracing. The choice of treatment must be individualized, considering these associations rather than causal relationships.
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Distal radius fractures (DRFs) are among the most prevalent in upper-extremity injuries, particularly in older adults and individuals with osteoporosis. The common treatment options include surgical interventions such as volar locking plate (VLP) fixation and percutaneous pinning, as well as conservative strategies like splinting and bracing. However, the comparative effectiveness of these modalities remains unclear. This study aims to compare the functional outcomes and complication rates associated with VLP, percutaneous pinning, bracing, and splinting in the treatment of DRFs.
METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library (September 2001-February 2025) identified randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and retrospective cohort studies comparing DRF treatments. Functional outcomes and complication rates (superficial infection, malunion, nonunion, delayed union) were analyzed. Data were analyzed using Review Manager Web with significance set at p ≤ 0.05.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies involving 3,200 patients met inclusion criteria: VLP fixation (n = 896), percutaneous pinning (n = 666), splinting (n = 718), and bracing (n = 903). No significant differences were observed between VLP and splinting or between bracing and splinting for Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH); Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE); or grip strength. Compared with VLP, percutaneous pinning demonstrated better PRWE scores but a higher infection rate. Compared with bracing, percutaneous pinning showed significantly better DASH, PRWE, and grip strength outcomes, although with substantial heterogeneity. Compared with bracing, VLP fixation yielded significantly better DASH, PRWE, and grip strength outcomes and a lower malunion rate.
CONCLUSION: All 4 treatments achieved acceptable outcomes, but with key trade-offs: Percutaneous Pinning had the best functional results but a higher infection risk. VLP provided better function and lower malunion rates than bracing. Splinting and bracing were effective conservative options, often yielding results similar to VLP, but were inferior in some specific measures. The findings suggest that a perfect anatomic repair is not always necessary for a good recovery. Ultimately, the choice of treatment must be individualized, weighing the functional benefits against the risks of complications, while considering patient health factors and preferences.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.