The goal of this study was to evaluate the role of conservative treatment of distal radius fractures in the elderly since 2000. Our series included 22 articles, of which 3 reviews, 2 meta-analyses, 6 descriptive series of conservative treatment, 10 series comparing surgical and conservative treatments and 1 series comparing different types of conservative treatments. The reduction was performed by closed reduction in 7 cases and by traction in 3 cases. A short-arm cast was used in 8 cases and a long-arm cast in 4 cases for an average length of 6 weeks. The indications of conservative treatment were varied: AO type A fractures in 2 cases, type C fractures in 1 case, types A and C in 8 cases and types A, B and C in 3 cases. No article reported any significant difference between surgical and conservative treatments in terms of DASH or PRWE, whereas strength was sometimes improved when surgical treatment was used. Radiological results were always better after surgical treatment. The rate of complications varied greatly, greater, equally or lower compared to conservative treatment depending on the series. All in all, there is no consensus to assert that a conservative treatment is more justified than a surgical treatment to treat distal radius fractures after the age of 65. Most authors consider that the long-term clinical outcome is identical and that the radiological result is better after surgical treatment. The fact that the fixation of a distal radius fracture by a volar locking plate after 65 years speeds up the recovery remains to be proven.
Keywords: Conservative treatment; Distal radius fracture; Older age.