Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in Distal Radius Fractures


Key Points

  • Diagnosis of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is challenging and remains a hot topic of debate as despite decades of research, the etiology remains entirely unclear.

  • Recent randomized controlled trials have questioned the role of vitamin C as a prophylactic treatment of CRPS in patients with distal radius fractures (DRFs).

  • The risk of CRPS following DRFs is independent of the fixation technique. However, tight casts and over distraction of the wrist joint using a spanning external fixator should be avoided.

  • Early detection and identification of a peripheral nerve compression that can be approached surgically is crucial to avoiding possible negative consequences such as drug dependency and long-term disability.

  • Physiotherapy with behavioral therapy components may be effective in ameliorating symptoms of CRPS and help the patient build coping mechanisms to regain functionality.

Panel 1: Case Scenario

A 67-year-old women with a history of fibromyalgia fell on her right wrist and suffered a DRF. The fracture was reduced to an acceptable position and treatment consisted of short arm casting. She presents to clinic 2 weeks after the fracture with disproportionate pain and finger stiffness. Swelling appears within normal limits and she is not showing signs of acute carpal tunnel syndrome or compartment syndrome. What are the best methods to prevent, diagnose, and eventually treat CRPS type 1 in this patient?

Importance of the Problem

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type I is defined as chronic pain without an identifiable nerve injury and is one of the principal causes of long-term disability following distal radius fractures. Pain is accompanied by trophic changes, impaired function, and finger stiffness as well as autonomic dysfunction ( Fig. 1 ). Patients with fibromyalgia, women, and smokers have a higher likelihood of developing this condition. Incidence of DRFs complicated by CRPS varies and is reported to affect 1%–37% of patients ; however, the etiology of this complication is not well understood. It has been correlated to tight casts and over distraction of the wrist joint with spanning external fixators ( Fig. 2 ), but these scenarios only account for a small fraction of the known clinical scenarios. Surgical decompression, particularly of the median nerve, has been shown to be effective in modulating the sequelae of CRPS associated with a DRF.

Fig. 1, Typical presentation of CRPS 8 weeks following distal radius fracture. Patient has swelling and peri-articular and palmar fibrosis with flexed posture as well as disproportional pain to light touch (A,B). Patient regained functional use of the hand following 4 months of intensive physical therapy (twice weekly sessions for greater than 90 min per session for 3 months then weekly until discharged) that also included use of edema gloves, continuous passive motion device, contrast bath for desensitization, and use of topical cream for pain relief (C,D).

Fig. 2, External fixator for distal radius fracture without features of CRPS.

Diagnosis of CRPS is challenging as it is based on clinical criteria ( Box 1 ) with mainly subjective components. Several diagnosis algorithms have been published over the years and currently, the most validated and internationally accepted is the Budapest Criteria ( Box 1 ). Radiographs may show disuse osteoporosis and peri-articular demineralization. Bone scan may show increased uptake, especially in phase 3 of the scan, but has low sensitivity. In general, imaging studies should be interpreted in light of the clinical findings and are usually not essential to diagnose CRPS. Early diagnosis is possible even 2 weeks after the injury and is associated with recovery in 80%–90% of cases. Late diagnosis of CRPS and inappropriate treatment can lead to chronic CRPS with residual pain and long-term disability up to 10 years after the injury with significant sociomedical and welfare consequences. Conversely, some prominent hand surgeons claim that CRPS does not exist and the symptoms can be explained by another pathology that was overlooked such as subclinical nerve compression, undetected nonunion, or fracture malreduction. Certainly, imaging and other advanced studies should be performed to rule out any pathology that may cause disproportional pain that may have been overlooked.

Box 1
Budapest Criteria for CRPS.

  • 1.

    Continuing pain, which is disproportionate to any inciting event

  • 2.

    At least one symptom in three of the four following categories:

    • Sensory: hyperesthesia/allodynia

    • Vasomotor: temperature/color change or asymmetry

    • Sudomotor/edema: edema/sweating change or asymmetry

    • Motor/trophic: decreased range of motion, motor dysfunction, or trophic changes

  • 3.

    At least one sign in two or more of the following categories:

    • Sensory: hyperalgesia (to pinprick) and/or allodynia (to light touch)

    • Vasomotor: temperature/color asymmetry

    • Sudomotor: edema/sweating change or asymmetry

    • Motor/Trophic: decreased range of motion, motor dysfunction and/or trophic changes

  • 4.

    There is no other diagnosis that better explains the signs and symptoms

The purpose of treatment of CRPS in DRFs is to restore the affected upper extremity within the acceptable mobility and durability requirements. There are many treatment modalities to treat CRPS, most with poor supporting evidence. Treatments such as bisphosphonates, N -acetylcysteine, glucocorticoids, calcitonin, pregabalin, gabapentin, antidepressant, antiepileptic drugs, clonidine, epidural infusion systems, and neurostimulation have all been reported yet limited studies exist. However, there has been extensive research regarding the role of vitamin C in the treatment of CRPS in patients with DRFs as well as literature regarding the role of physical therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy. These latter treatment modalities will be the focus of this chapter.

Main Question

How can CRPS type-1 be effectively prevented, diagnosed, and/or treated in patients with DRF?

Current Opinion

The diagnosis of CRPS remains challenged and debated because of its lacking objectifiable character and etiologic understanding. Several treatment modalities have been offered over the years to treat CRPS following DRF, most with poor supporting evidence. There is an ongoing debate, accompanied by high quality evidence, about the role of Vitamin C in the prevention of CRPS. Other areas of controversy relate to the role of physical therapy with behavioral components in the treatment of CRPS and if there is an association between the distal radius fixation method to the occurrence of CRPS. Additionally, in recent years, a paradigm shift among surgeons has developed to find the culprit of the pain and offer surgical treatment. This paradigm shift is currently supported mainly by expert opinion and case series.

Finding the Evidence

The search was conducted in MEDLINE via PubMed and the Cochrane library. The search terms were broad and included the intervention (“vitamin C,” “physiotherapy,” “physical therapy,” “psychotherapy,” “cognitive behavioral therapy,” “nerve block,” “cast,” “external fixation,” “open reduction internal fixation”), population (“wrist fracture,” “distal radius fracture”), and disease of interest [“complex regional pain syndrome (or CRPS),” “reflex sympathetic dystrophy (or RSD),” “Sudeck's atrophy”]. Additionally, we searched for review articles of CRPS in DRF using the general terms “distal radius fracture” and “CRPS.” No time limits were set. The reference list of the review articles and metanalyses retrieved were additionally reviewed to identify other papers not included in our other broader search.

Quality of Evidence

We attempted to limit our examination to level I or II prospective randomized trials and metanalyses. However, to better define the role of surgery in the treatment of CRPS, we included several case series.

  • Level I—4 randomized controlled trials, 5 systematic review and metanalysis.

  • Level II—3 randomized controlled trials with methodological limitations.

  • Level III—5 case series.

You're Reading a Preview

Become a Clinical Tree membership for Full access and enjoy Unlimited articles

Become membership

If you are a member. Log in here