PubMed2005
There are practical recommendations that can be drawn from the aforementioned results. Due to the minimal morbidity of the wrist denervation, patients with good but painful wrist motion following fracture of the distal radius should first be evaluated for wrist denervation unless formal resection of the dorsal interosseous nerve has clearly been included in the previous treatment. The evaluation is performed in a standardized manner before and after test infiltration of both interosseous nerves. This evaluation includes assessment of pain, strength, and working capacity. Whereas the grip strength often does not (cannot)increase more than 10% to 20%, the subjective pain relief can be remarkable, leading to higher repetition counts and increased dexterity. Inpatients with insufficient response to the anesthetic nerve blocks, other pain sources must be sought, especially on the ulnar side of the wrist. Patients with less than functional range are candidates for complete arthrodesis. A way for further evaluation with regard to the potential of partial and complete wrist arthrodesis is trial immobilization of the wrist in a light cast ora firm reinforced brace. Trial immobilization also allows anticipating the functional deficit from loss of range of wrist motion. Due to the still-unrestricted pronation and supination, ulnar-sid-ed wrist pain may persist and will need adequate follow-up adjunct treatment. Patients who have good pain relief but are not willing to completely lose their wrist motion should be evaluated fluoroscopically or receive lateral radiographs in full flexion and extension to measure their mid-carpal joint mobility and anticipate the potential residual motion after radiocarpal fusion. Patients without pain relief from test anesthesia, trial immobilization, and no apparent distal radioulnar joint pathology are poor candidates for further operative treatment.In evaluating different salvage procedures,among all diagnoses, painful arthritis following fracture of the distal radius is the most difficult to treat and yields the poorest results. Emphasis must therefore be on better initial fracture treatment and earlier secondary reconstructive interventions. The current salvage procedures must allow further improvement or alternatives must be developed. Prosthetic replacement merits serious consideration, especially when it can be adapted to the specific post-traumatic setting. This situation is not worse than rheumatoid arthritis because the clinician is dealing with healthy and strong intact bone stock, tendons, and ligaments,and most important, complete absence of a progressive disease.