Download PDF
J Wrist Surg
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1785499
Scientific Article

Cuboid Bone for Distal Radius Reconstruction: An Anatomical Study by 3D Models

Pedro Alvedro-Ruiz
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University and Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
,
Ana Trapero-Ovejero
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University and Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
,
Joan Ferràs-Tarragó
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University and Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
,
Alberto Pérez-García
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University and Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
,
Alessandro Thione
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University and Polytechnic Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Distal radius (DR) reconstruction due to high-energy trauma, degenerative processes, and oncologic resections can be a challenge when the articular surface is destroyed or resected. This study investigates the possibility of using the cuboid bone of the foot to replace the osteoarticular surface of DR.

Purposes We compared the three-dimensional (3D) morphology of the articular surface of three foot bones with that of the DR to analyze which one would be the most suitable to replace it.

Methods 3D bone models were created from a computed tomography (CT) scan database. The articular surfaces of calcaneus, cuboid bone, and lateral cuneiform bone were compared with that of the DR using the Hausdorff-Besicovitch morphometry analysis. Mean, maximum, and minimum differences were obtained and statistically analyzed.

Results The cuboid bone had a mean overall area difference with the DR of 0.72 mm (standard deviation [SD], 0.03 mm). The lateral cuneiform bone showed 0.89 mm (SD, 0.08 mm). The calcaneus presented 1.04 mm (SD, 0.06 mm). The differences and the variability of the articular surface were statistically lower in the cuboid bone.

Conclusion The articular surface of the cuboid bone has many similarities to the articular surface of the DR and had the most similarities to the DR of the foot bones study. The cuboid bone could be considered as a replacement for the DR in cases where there is a need for osteoarticular replacement or reconstruction. Further investigations are warranted.

Clinical Relevance A vascularized transfer of the cuboid bone may be a suitable option to replace a DR given the anatomical similarities reported.

Keywords

distal radius reconstruction - cuboid bone flap - distal radioulnar joint - reconstructive surgery - microsurgery


Publication History

Received: 24 November 2023

Accepted: 12 March 2024

Article published online:
15 April 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Huang JI, Hanel DP. Anatomy and biomechanics of the distal radioulnar joint. Hand Clin 2012; 28 (02) 157-163
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Moritomo H. The distal interosseous membrane: current concepts in wrist anatomy and biomechanics. J Hand Surg Am 2012; 37 (07) 1501-1507
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Wolfe SW, Pederson WC, Kozin SH, Cohen MS. 2021. Green's Operative Hand Surgery E-Book: 2-Volume Set. Elsevier Health Sciences;
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Ferràs-Tarragó J, Sanchis-Alfonso V, Ramírez-Fuentes C, Roselló-Añón A, Baixauli-García F. A 3D-CT analysis of femoral symmetry-surgical implications. J Clin Med 2020; 9 (11) 3546
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Cignoni P, Rocchini C, Scopigno R. Metro: Measuring Error on Simplified Surfaces. Comput. Graph. Forum 1998; 17: 167-174
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 del Piñal F, Klausmeyer M, Moraleda E. et al. Vascularized graft from the metatarsal base for reconstructing major osteochondral distal radius defects. J Hand Surg Am 2013; 38 (10) 1883-1895
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Vander Griend RA, Funderburk CH. The treatment of giant-cell tumors of the distal part of the radius. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75 (06) 899-908
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 van der Heijden L, Dijkstra PD, van de Sande MA. et al. The clinical approach toward giant cell tumor of bone. Oncologist 2014; 19 (05) 550-561
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Nypaver C, Bozentka DJ. Distal radius fracture and the distal radioulnar joint. Hand Clin 2021; 37 (02) 293-307
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Kocher MS, Gebhardt MC, Mankin HJ. Reconstruction of the distal aspect of the radius with use of an osteoarticular allograft after excision of a skeletal tumor. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998; 80 (03) 407-419
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Bianchi G, Donati D, Staals EL, Mercuri M. Osteoarticular allograft reconstruction of the distal radius after bone tumour resection. J Hand Surg [Br] 2005; 30 (04) 369-373
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Szabo RM, Anderson KA, Chen JL. Functional outcome of en bloc excision and osteoarticular allograft replacement with the Sauve-Kapandji procedure for Campanacci grade 3 giant-cell tumor of the distal radius. J Hand Surg Am 2006; 31 (08) 1340-1348
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Chung DW, Han CS, Lee JH, Lee SG. Outcomes of wrist arthroplasty using a free vascularized fibular head graft for Enneking stage II giant cell tumors of the distal radius. Microsurgery 2013; 33 (02) 112-118
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Zoccali C, Formica VM, Sperduti I. et al. Wide resection for giant-cell tumor of the distal radius: which reconstruction? A systematic review of the literature and pooled analysis of 176 cases. Hand Surg Rehabil 2022; 41 (05) 552-560
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Bianchi G, Sambri A, Marini E, Piana R, Campanacci DA, Donati DM. Wrist arthrodesis and osteoarticular reconstruction in giant cell tumor of the distal radius. J Hand Surg Am 2020; 45 (09) 882.e1-882.e6
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Kuruoglu D, Rizzo M, Rose PS, Moran SL, Houdek MT. Treatment of giant cell tumors of the distal radius: a long-term patient-reported outcomes study. J Surg Oncol 2022; 126 (04) 798-803
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Qu H, Guo W, Li D, Yang Y, Wei R, Xu J. Functional results of wrist arthrodesis versus arthroplasty with proximal fibula following giant cell tumour excision of the distal radius. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2019; 44 (04) 394-401
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Liu W, Wang B, Zhang S, Li Y, Hu B, Shao Z. Wrist reconstruction after en bloc resection of bone tumors of the distal radius. Orthop Surg 2021; 13 (02) 376-383
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 del Piñal F, Guerrero-Navarro ML, Studer A, Thams C, Moraleda E. Reconstruction of the ulnar head with a vascularized second metatarsal head: case report. J Hand Surg Am 2012; 37 (08) 1568-1573
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Cavadas PC, Thione A, Martinez IE. Distal ulna reconstruction using the second metatarsal: anatomical study. J Wrist Surg 2016; 5 (02) 160-164
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Cavadas PC, Thione A. Ulnar head reconstruction with microvascular second metatarsal. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2017; 5 (04) e1284
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Leung F, Ozkan M, Chow SP. Conservative treatment of intra-articular fractures of the distal radius–factors affecting functional outcome. Hand Surg 2000; 5 (02) 145-153
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Karnezis IA, Panagiotopoulos E, Tyllianakis M, Megas P, Lambiris E. Correlation between radiological parameters and patient-rated wrist dysfunction following fractures of the distal radius. Injury 2005; 36 (12) 1435-1439
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Nunley JA, Hamid KS. Vascularized pedicle bone-grafting from the cuboid for talar osteonecrosis: results of a novel salvage procedure. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (10) 848-854
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar