0
Scientific Article   |    
Surgical Treatment of Nonunion and Avascular Necrosis of the Proximal Part of the Scaphoid in Adolescents
Peter M. Waters, MD; Susan L. Stewart, MD
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2002; 84:915-920 
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this retrospective study was to examine the clinical and radiographic results of treatment of proximal scaphoid nonunion and avascular necrosis with vascularized bone graft from the distal part of the radius in adolescent patients.

Methods: Between 1993 and 1996, three adolescents with a proximal scaphoid nonunion and avascular necrosis underwent vascularized bone-grafting and internal fixation. The mean age at the time of the fracture was 14.8 years (14.4, 14.6, and 15.3 years), and the mean time interval between the fracture and the surgery was 19.3 months (six, seventeen, and thirty-five months). We retrospectively reviewed all available clinical and radiographic data from the time of fracture to the time of the last follow-up. All patients were examined clinically and radiographically at the time of the review, at a mean of 5.5 years (five, five, and 6.5 years) after surgery.

Results: All fractures healed at a mean of 3.4 months (2.75, 3.0, and 4.5 months) postoperatively. Final follow-up radiographs showed union and revascularization of the proximal part of the scaphoid with no evidence of degeneration of the radiocarpal joint. None of the patients had limiting pain or scapholunate instability demonstrated on physical or radiographic examination. Dorsiflexion and radial deviation of the affected wrist were decreased by a mean of 22° (10°, 22°, and 35°) and 15° (5°, 20°, and 20°), respectively, compared with those of the normal wrist.

Conclusion: Grafting with vascularized radial bone is an effective treatment, leading to union and good function, for nonunion and avascular necrosis of the proximal part of the scaphoid in adolescents.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $30
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org
    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe




    James D Heckman MD
    Posted on June 17, 2002
    Editor's Response
    JBJS

    Dr Mehlman: You make an excellent point. I believe that in this case we erred and should have published this series of three cases in the 'Case Reports' section of the Journal. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. We will try to be more scrupulous regarding such designations in the future. JDH

    Charles T Mehlman
    Posted on June 16, 2002
    What constitutes a case report?
    Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center

    To the Editor:

    Two valuable articles that appear in the June 2002 issue of the Journal are those by Waters & Stewart (AVN of the scaphoid in adolescents) and Luk et al (anterior approach to cerviothoracic junction).

    It is interesting to note that the Waters & Stewart paper includes three (3) patients and is presented in the Jouranl as a scientific study while the Luk paper with its five (5) patients is presented as a case report fashion. This begs the question: What constitutes a case report?

    The implications of how an article is labeled can be significant. For instance, when a structured review or meta-analysis is conducted case reports are almost always automatically eliminated from consideration. One would certainly hope that an evidence-based reviewer would identify the Waters & Stewart paper for what it is - an important three (3) patient case report.

    Related Articles
    Related Cases
    Related Content
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    jbjs jobs
    12/22/2011
    ME - Central Maine Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    VA - Charleston Area Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    Virginia - Charleston Area Medical Center