Clinical classification and treatment strategy of hamate hook fracture

Abstract

To explore the clinical classification of hamate hook fracture and the treatment strategy for different type of fractures, 12 patients who suffered from hamate hook fractures were followed up retrospectively. According to the fracture sites and the prognosis, we classified the hamate hook fractures into 3 types. Type I referred to an avulsion fracture at the tip of hamate hook, type II was a fracture in the middle part of hamate hook, and type III represented a fracture at the base of hamate hook. By the classification, in our series, only 1 fell into type I, 7 type II, and 4 type III. The results were evaluated with respect to the functional recovery, recovery time and the association among the clinical classification, pre-operative complications and treatment results. The average follow-up time of this group was 8.4±3.9 months. Two cases were found to have fracture non-union and both of them were type II fractures. Six patients had complications before operation. Five cases were type II fractures and 1 case type III fracture. All the patients were satisfied with the results at the time of the last follow-up. Their pain scale and grip strength improved significantly after treatment. All the pre-operative complications were relieved. The recovery time of hamate hook excision was significantly shorter than that of the other two treatments. The incidences of both pre-operative complications and non-union in type II fractures were higher than those in type I and type III fractures. It was concluded that, generally, the treatment effects with hamate hook fracture are quite good. The complication incidence and prognosis of the fracture are closely related to the clinical classification. Early intervention is critical for type II fractures.

Keywords

hamate hook, fracture / clinical classification / treatment / follow-up

References

[1] DunnW.. Fractures and dislocations of the carpus. Surg Clin North Am, 1972, 52(6): 1513-1538

[2] WalshJ.J.4th, BishopA.T.. Diagnosis and management of hamate hook fractures. Hand Clin, 2000, 16(3): 397-403

[3] BoulasH.J., MilekM.A.. Hook of the hamate fractures. Diagnosis, treatment, and complications. Orthop Rev, 1990, 19(6): 518-529

[4] MilekM.A., BoulasH.J.. Flexor tendon ruptures secondary to hamate hook fractures. J Hand Surg Am, 1990, 15(5): 740-744

[5] JacksonT., RayanG.M.. Avulsion fracture of the hamulus from clay gunshot sport: a case report. J Hand Surg, 2005, 30A(4): 702-705

[6] StarkH.H., ChaoE.K., ZemelN.P., et al.. Fracture of the hook of the hamate. J Bone Joint Surg, 1989, 71A(8): 1202-1207

[7] De SchrijverF., De SmetL.. Fracture of the hook of the hamate, often misdiagnosed as “wrist sprain”. J Emerg Med, 2001, 20(1): 47-51

[8] WhalenJ.L., BishopA.T., LinscheidR.L.. Nonoperative treatment of acute hamate hook fractures. J Hand Surg, 1992, 17A(3): 507-511

[9] ScheuflerO., AndresenR., RadmerS., et al.. Hook of hamate fractures: critical evaluation of different therapeutic procedures. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2005, 115(2): 488-497

[10] EgawaM., AsaiT.. Fracture of the hook of the hamate: Report of six cases and the suitability of computerized tomography. J Hand Surg, 1983, 8A(4): 393-398

[11] FoucherG., SchuindF., MerleM., et al.. Fractures of the hook of the hamate. J Hand Surg, 1985, 10B(2): 205-210

[12] AldridgeJ.M.3rd, MallonW.J.. Hook of the hamate fractures in competitive golfers: results of treatment by excision of the fractured hook of the hamate. Orthopedics, 2003, 26(7): 717-719

[13] DemirkanF., CalandruccioJ.H., DiangeloD.. Biomechanical evaluation of flexor tendon function after hamate hook excision. J Hand Surg, 2003, 28A(1): 138-143