Intracarpal shortening osteotomy for Kienböck's disease: A retrospective study of 28 cases.

INTRODUCTION

Kienböck's disease is rare in patients with a neutral or positive ulnar variance. In these situations, treatment is challenging and controversial. Various intracarpal shortening osteotomy (ICSO) procedures have been proposed.

OBJECTIVE

Study the effect of the type of ICSO (isolated capitate osteotomy or combined with hamate osteotomy) on the clinical and radiological outcomes in a retrospective series.

METHODS

Patients with Kienböck's disease were treated with ICSO. A dorsal approach centered over the capitate was used. The transverse osteotomy was located 5mm below the capitate's proximal chondral boundary. The osteotomy cut was 2mm thick. In some patients, a hamate osteotomy was done at the same level as that of the capitate. The osteotomy site was fixed with staples. Cases were classified as with or without a vascularized bone graft was added to the ICSO.

RESULTS

There were 28 cases and the average follow-up was 43 months. Three patients required surgical revision. Pain relief at rest was achieved in all patients. The flexion/extension range of motion was 84°. Strength was 75% of the opposite side. The mean QuickDASH was 32.5 and the PRWE (Patient Related Wrist Evaluation) was 30.2. Isolated capitate osteotomy resulted in better satisfaction and improved ulnar/radial deviation and flexion range of motion. There was no difference in terms of pain, strength and functional scores. However, it triggered a significant increase in the radioscaphoid angle. Adding a vascularized bone graft did not impact the outcomes.

DISCUSSION: Isolated capitate osteotomy provides better outcomes than combined capitate/hamate osteotomy (satisfaction and wrist range of motion) and should be done as the primary procedure. However, since it increases the radioscaphoid angle more than combined capitate/hamate osteotomy, the latter procedure should be used when a large radioscaphoid angle exists preoperatively. We found no benefit of using a vascularized graft.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.