Favorable results after total wrist arthroplasty

Figures & data

Figure 1. The Re-motion TWA with the metallic radial and carpal components and the intercalated polyethylene ball.

Figure 2. Frontal radiograph of the Re-motion TWA in a 75-year old woman with primary osteoarthrosis.

Table 1. Patient demographics

Median age at operation (range)	58 (30–78)
Sex, men/women ^a	17/48
Side, dominant/non-dominant ^b	33/32
Median follow-up time (range), years	6 (5–9)
Diagnosis
Rheumatoid arthritis	50
Idiopathic osteoarthrosis (OA)	6
Posttraumatic arthritis	8
Kienboeck’s disease	1

^a Numbers of wrists

^b 5 were operated bilaterally

Table 2. Clinical results at the latest follow-up (“Post”) compared to preoperative values (“Pre”). Mean values (SD), but median (range) for QuickDASH

	Rheumatoid cases		Non-rheumatoid cases		p-value ^a	All cases		p-value ^b
	Pre	Post	Pre	Post	Pre	Post
Pain (0–100 on VAS)	66 (20)	29 (26)	72 (12)	23 (38)	0.6	67 (17)	27 (29)	0.001
Grip strength (KgF)	9 (8)	14 (8)	16 (14)	19 (13)	0.3	10 (10)	15 (10)	0.03
QuickDASH (0–100)	61 (41–89)	41 (8–84)	41 (14–79)	50 (0–61)	0.5	58 (14–89)	42 (0–84)	0.001
Motion (degrees)
Supination	71 (22)	81 (13)	72 (35)	89 (4)	0.003	71 (25)	83 (12)	0.005
Pronation	71 (16)	80 (10)	82 (12)	85 (13)	0.3	79 (15)	81 (11)	0.5
Extension	27 (16)	28 (15)	43 (18)	43 (22)	0.06	30 (17)	31 (18)	0.8
Flexion	25 (21)	25 (16)	50 (19)	44 (23)	0.003	31 (23)	29 (19)	0.7
Radial	7 (11)	6 (8)	14 (8)	7 (5)	0.6	8 (11)	6 (8)	0.3
Ulnar	14 (8)	20 (14)	23 (14)	28 (16)	0.2	16 (11)	22 (14)	0.02

^a Significance of differences between the rheumatoid cases and the non-rheumatoid cases at follow-up.

^b Signifcance of differences between preoperative values and values at follow-up for the total sample.

Figure 3. Pain on Visual analogue scale before operation and at follow-up. The dotted line represents equivalency.

Figure 4. QuickDASH-score before operation and at follow-up. The dotted line represents equivalency.

Figure 5. Motion before operation and at follow-up. The dotted line represents equivalency.

Figure 6. Implant survival curve with CI.