The use of arthroscopy of the hand and wrist has recently increased sharply in the elective setting and this, not surprisingly, has been followed by an increasing use in the trauma setting. Advocates for the use of arthroscopy in these patients cite the improved assessment of the displacement and reduction of fractures and the early diagnosis of associated injuries, while others temper this with concerns about increased operating time and possible complications. The data relating to patient-reported benefits and costs are limited. The aim of this review was to discuss the current available literature for the use of arthroscopy in the management of injuries of the hand and wrist. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2025;107-B(3):291–295

This paper describes the presence of tenodesis effects in normal physiology and explores the uses of operative tenodesis in surgery of the upper limb.

The fracture most commonly treated by orthopaedic surgeons is that of the distal radius. However, as yet there is no consensus on what constitutes an ‘acceptable’ radiological position before or after treatment. This should be defined as the position that will predict good function in the majority of cases. In this paper we review the radiological indices that can be measured in fractures of the distal radius and try to identify potential predictors of functional outcome. In patients likely to have high functional demands, we recommend that the articular reconstruction be achieved with less than 2 mm of gap or step-off, the radius be restored to within 2 mm of its normal length, and that carpal alignment be restored. The ultimate aim of treatment is a pain-free, mobile wrist joint without functional limitation.

Despite advances in the prevention and treatment of osteoporotic fractures, their prevalence continues to increase. Their operative treatment remains a challenge for the surgeon, often with unpredictable outcomes. This review highlights the current aspects of management of these fractures and focuses on advances in implant design and surgical technique.

Biochemical markers of bone-turnover have long been used to complement the radiological assessment of patients with metabolic bone disease. Their implementation in daily clinical practice has been helpful in the understanding of the pathogenesis of osteoporosis, the selection of the optimal dose and the understanding of the progression of the onset and resolution of treatment. Since they are derived from both cortical and trabecular bone, they reflect the metabolic activity of the entire skeleton rather than that of individual cells or the process of mineralisation.

Quantitative changes in skeletal-turnover can be assessed easily and non-invasively by the measurement of bone-turnover markers. They are commonly subdivided into three categories; 1) bone-resorption markers, 2) osteoclast regulatory proteins and 3) bone-formation markers. Because of the rapidly accumulating new knowledge of bone matrix biochemistry, attempts have been made to use them in the interpretation and characterisation of various stages of the healing of fractures. Early knowledge of the individual progress of a fracture could help to avoid delayed or nonunion by enabling modification of the host’s biological response.

The levels of bone-turnover markers vary throughout the course of fracture repair with their rates of change being dependent on the size of the fracture and the time that it will take to heal. However, their short-term biological variability, the relatively low bone specificity exerted, given that the production and destruction of collagen is not limited to bone, as well as the influence of the host’s metabolism on their concentration, produce considerable intra- and inter-individual variability in their interpretation. Despite this, the possible role of bone-turnover markers in the assessment of progression to union, the risks of delayed or nonunion and the impact of innovations to accelerate fracture healing must not be ignored.