Proximal row carpectomy versus four-corner arthrodesis: a retrospective comparative study

Abstract

Background: Four-corner arthrodesis with scaphoid excision (FCA) and proximal row carpal resection (PRC) are frequently performed in wrists with post-traumatic Scaphoid Non- Union Advanced Collapse (SNAC)/Scapho-Lunate Advanced Collapse (SLAC) osteoarthritis. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of these two procedures. Methods: This single-center, retrospective cohort study included all patients who had PRC or FCA between January 1st, 2009 and January 1st, 2019 and who were followed up. Follow-up included: mobility (radial deviation, ulnar deviation, flexion, extension), strength (grip test, pinch test), function (QuickDash, patient-rated wrist evaluation [PRWE]), subjective mobility, and global satisfaction scores. Results: Among 25 patients included, 11 had PRC and 14 had FCA with a mean follow-up of 69.5 months [12–132]. Radial deviation was 18° versus 14° (p = 0.7), ulnar deviation was 21° versus 22° (p = 0.15), flexion was 39° versus 30° (p = 0.32), extension was 32.5° versus 29.5° (p = 0.09), grip test compared to the controlateral side was 72% versus 62% (p = 0.53), Quick Dash score was 12.5 versus 17.6 (p = 0.84), PRWE was 18.7 versus 17.6 (p = 0.38), subjective mobility was 7.8 versus 7.5 (p = 0.23), and satisfaction score was 8.7 versus 9 (p = 0.76), respectively, in the FCA group and the PRC group. Re-operation rates were 14% patients in the FCA group and 0% in the PRC group. Conclusion: This study found no significant difference between FCA and PRC on strength, mobility, and function in patients with post-traumatic SLAC or SNAC stage II wrist arthritis. Both FCA and PRC seem to be reliable surgical techniques with good outcomes with more revision in the FCA group.