Abstract
A retrospective review of 51 consecutive patients undergoing fixation of Scaphoid fractures by two surgeons in a single institution was conducted. Twenty-four patients were treated with a Herbert screw and twenty-seven with an Acutrak screw. This included six patients who underwent acute fixation, three in each group. The remaining cases were for the treatment of non-union and delayed union.
There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, side of injury, and mechanism of injury. Fractures were classified as proximal, middle and distal thirds of the Scaphoid and there was no significant difference between the groups regarding the types of fractures treated. The only significant difference between the groups was the time from injury to fixation when considering the cases of delayed union and non union which was greater in the Herbert screw group (7.5 months vs 4 months p=<0.05).
There was no significant difference in outcome between the two methods of fixation. Union rates for all cases were 79% for Herbert screws and 81% for Acutrak screws and 82% and 83% respectively when only considering the delayed union/non-union procedures. There was no difference in terms of time to union, further surgery or clinical outcome between the two groups. The Acutrak screw required removal in five patients and the Herbert screw in two due to symptoms from screw prominence. This was not statistically significant.
In conclusion there is no significant difference in surgical outcome between these two methods of fixation for Scaphoid fractures. The authors feel that this supports the view that biological factors are more important than the method of fixation in obtaining union of Scaphoid fractures.
