Prospective continuous study comparing intrafocal cross-pinning HK2(®) with a locking plate in distal radius fracture fixation.

The fixation of distal radius fractures by pinning or locking plates remains controversial. The aim of this prospective continuous study was to compare the results of 28 anterior locking plates with 23 intrafocal cross-pinning HK2(®) systems. The mean age of group I (SVP(®), SBI™ plate) was 61 years. There were 15 extra-articular and 13 articular fractures. The mean age of group II (HK2(®), Arex™) was 63 years, with 13 extra-articular and 10 articular fractures. Twelve clinical variables were measured: pain, wrist strength, supination strength, pronation strength, quick DASH score, range of wrist motion in flexion, extension, pronation, and supination, ulnar variance, radial slope, and radial volar tilt. At 40 weeks follow-up, there was no difference between the two groups for 10 variables; two variables showed differences between the two groups: mean quick DASH score was 10.7 for group I, 19.7 for group II, and mean ulnar variance was -0.95 mm for group I, and 1.16 mm for group II. Six transient complications were noted for group I: five tenosynovitis, and one carpal tunnel syndrome. We noted 12 complications in group II: four superficial infections, two secondary displacements, one pin migration, two CRPS type II, two tendon ruptures and one nerve irritation. Generally, plates provided a more stable fixation associated with less complications while the HK2(®) system was quicker and less costly. The indications for its use need to be refined with a larger series and longer follow-up.