[Distal radius intraarticular fractures: fluoroscopy reduction versus arthroscopic assistance. Systematic review].

INTRODUCTION

Intraarticular distal radius fractures are a therapeutic challenge for the orthopedist surgeon there are studies that support the use of fluoroscopy, and others promote arthroscopy, with this work we try to summarize the evidence, to determine whether arthroscopic assistance provides additional benefits to avoid joint incongruities compared to results obtained under fluoroscopic assistance.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

Systematic search for prospective, retrospective, cohort, follow-up, clinical trials on PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Scielo, Embase, Google Scholar and other national sources, including as keywords the terms: "intra-articular distal radius fracture", "wrist arthroscopy", "arthroscopy", "fluoroscopy". The average values and standard offsets for each characteristic, obtained from the selected works, were analyzed using descriptive statistics and illustrative graphs.

RESULTS

463 patients (256 women and 207 men) were evaluated, with an average age of 48.29 years and range from 39 to 64 years. The two treatments (A and F) were homogeneous in terms of the age of the patients reporting (p = 0.5820) and the average follow-up time (p = 0.9597). Only the ulnar deviation and DASH score, for which the arthroscopy group performed best, in the remaining variables the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSION

The evidence available to date is conflicting, and does not allow recommendations to be made for or against these interventions, finding other factors that could influence decision-making.