-
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma Aug 2021To assess the effectiveness of suprapatellar (SP)-nailing versus infrapatellar (IP)-nailing of tibia fractures in anterior knee pain, complications (retropatellar...
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of suprapatellar (SP)-nailing versus infrapatellar (IP)-nailing of tibia fractures in anterior knee pain, complications (retropatellar chondropathy, infection, and malalignment) and physical functioning and quality of life. A clinical question-driven and thorough systematic review of current literature is provided.
DATA SOURCE
PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2020 relating to SP and IP-nailing of tibia fractures. The study is performed in concordance with PRISMA-guidelines.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies eligible for inclusion were randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective observational studies reporting on outcomes of interest.
DATA EXTRACTION
Data extraction was performed independently by 2 assessors. Methodological quality and risk of bias was assessed according to the guidelines of the McMaster Critical Appraisal.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Continuous variables are presented as means with SD and dichotomous variables as frequency and percentages. The weighted mean, standardized weighted mean differences, and 95% confidence interval were calculated. A pooled analysis could not be performed because of differences in outcome measures, time-points, and heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies with 1447 patients were analyzed. The weighted incidence of anterior knee pain was 29% after SP-nailing and 39% after IP-nailing, without reported significance. There was a significant lower rate of malalignment after the SP-approach (4% vs. 26%) with small absolute differences in all planes. No substantial differences were observed in retropatellar chondropathy, infection, physical functioning, and quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review does not reveal superiority of either technique in any of the respective outcomes of interest. Definitive choice should depend on the surgeon's experience and available resources.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Topics: Bone Nails; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Humans; Pain; Patella; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Tibia; Tibial Fractures
PubMed: 34267147
DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002043 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2021Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a huge challenge and burden to patients, healthcare systems and society. The increased proportion of older... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a huge challenge and burden to patients, healthcare systems and society. The increased proportion of older adults in the world population means that the absolute number of hip fractures is rising rapidly across the globe. The majority of hip fractures are treated surgically. This review evaluates evidence for types of internal fixation implants used in joint-preserving surgery for intracapsular hip fractures.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the relative effects (benefits and harms) of different implants for the internal fixation of intracapsular hip fractures in older adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Epistemonikos, Proquest Dissertations and Theses, and National Technical Information Service in July 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, reference lists of retrieved articles and conducted backward-citation searches.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing implants used for internal fixation of fragility intracapsular proximal femoral fractures in older adults. Types of implants were smooth pins (these include pins with fold-out hooks), screws, or fixed angle plates. We excluded studies in which all or most fractures were caused by specific pathologies other than osteoporosis or were the result of a high energy trauma.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. One review author extracted data and assessed risk of bias which was checked by a second review author. We collected data for seven outcomes: activities of daily living (ADL), delirium, functional status, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), mobility, mortality (reported within four months of surgery as early mortality, and at 12 months since surgery), and unplanned return to theatre for treating a complication resulting directly or indirectly from the primary procedure (such as deep infection or non-union). We assessed the certainty of the evidence for these outcomes using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 38 studies (32 RCTs, six quasi-RCTs) with 8585 participants with 8590 intracapsular fractures. The mean ages of participants in the studies ranged from 60 to 84 years; 73% were women, and 38% of fractures were undisplaced. We report here the findings of the four main comparisons, which were between different categories of implants. We downgraded the certainty of the outcomes for imprecision (when data were available from insufficient numbers of participants or the confidence interval (CI) was wide), study limitations (e.g. high or unclear risks of bias), and inconsistency (when we noted substantial levels of statistical heterogeneity). Smooth pins versus fixed angle plate (four studies, 1313 participants) We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two implant types in independent mobility with no more than one walking stick (1 study, 112 participants), early mortality (1 study, 383 participants), mortality at 12 months (2 studies, 661 participants), and unplanned return to theatre (3 studies, 736 participants). No studies reported on ADL, delirium, functional status, or HRQoL. Screws versus fixed angle plates (11 studies, 2471 participants) We found low-certainty evidence of no clinically important differences between the two implant types in functional status using WOMAC (MD -3.18, 95% CI -6.35 to -0.01; 2 studies, 498 participants; range of scores from 0 to 96, lower values indicate better function), and HRQoL using EQ-5D (MD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.06; 2 studies, 521 participants; range -0.654 (worst), 0 (dead), 1 (best)). We also found low-certainty evidence showing little or no difference between the two implant types in mortality at 12 months (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.31; 7 studies, 1690 participants), and unplanned return to theatre (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.26; 11 studies, 2321 participants). We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two implant types in independent mobility (1 study, 70 participants), and early mortality (3 studies, 467 participants). No studies reported on ADL or delirium. Screws versus smooth pins (seven studies, 1119 participants) We found low-certainty evidence of no or little difference between the two implant types in mortality at 12 months (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.35; 6 studies, 1005 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two implant types in early mortality (3 studies, 584 participants) and unplanned return to theatre (5 studies, 862 participants). No studies reported on ADL, delirium, functional status, HRQoL, or mobility. Screws or smooth pins versus fixed angle plates (15 studies, 3784 participants) In this comparison, we combined data from the first two comparison groups. We found low-certainty evidence of no or little difference between the two groups of implants in mortality at 12 months (RR 1.04, 95% CI.083 to 1.31; 7 studies, 1690 participants) and unplanned return to theatre (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18; 14 studies, 3057 participants). We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two groups of implants in independent mobility (2 studies, 182 participants), and early mortality (4 studies, 850 participants). We found no additional evidence to support the findings for functional status or HRQoL as reported in 'Screws versus fixed angle plates'. No studies reported ADL or delirium.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is low-certainty evidence that there may be little or no difference between screws and fixed angle plates in functional status, HRQoL, mortality at 12 months, or unplanned return to theatre; and between screws and pins in mortality at 12 months. The limited and very low-certainty evidence for the outcomes for which data were available for the smooth pins versus fixed angle plates comparison, as well as the other outcomes for which data were available for the screws and fixed angle plates, and screws and pins comparisons means we have very little confidence in the estimates of effect for these outcomes. Additional RCTs would increase the certainty of the evidence. We encourage such studies to report outcomes consistent with the core outcome set for hip fracture, including long-term quality of life indicators such as ADL and mobility.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Bias; Bone Nails; Bone Plates; Bone Screws; Confidence Intervals; Female; Femur Head; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Hip Fractures; Hip Joint; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Organ Sparing Treatments; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33687067
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013409.pub2 -
Journal of Orthopaedics and... Apr 2023This review was conducted to compare the efficacy of suprapatellar (SP) and infrapatellar (IP) approaches for treating distal tibial fractures with intramedullary... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
This review was conducted to compare the efficacy of suprapatellar (SP) and infrapatellar (IP) approaches for treating distal tibial fractures with intramedullary nailing.
METHOD
This systematic review included studies comparing the outcomes of patients receiving nailing for distal tibial fractures using the SP and IP approaches. We searched the Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase databases for relevant studies till 18th Sep. 2022. We used the Newcastle Ottawa Scale to assess study quality and a random-effects meta-analysis to synthesize the outcomes. We used the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) for continuous data and the odds ratio (OR) with the 95% CI for dichotomous data.
RESULTS
Four studies with 586 patients (302 in the SP group and 284 in the IP group) were included in this systematic review. The SP group may have had little or no difference in pain and slightly better knee function (MD 3.90 points, 95% CI 0.83 to 5.36) and better ankle function (MD: 8.25 points, 95% CI 3.35 to 13.15) than the IP group 12 months after surgery. Furthermore, compared to the IP group, the SP group had a lower risk of malalignment (OR: 0.22, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.75; number needed to treat (NNT): 6), a lower risk for open reduction (OR: 0.58, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.97; NNT: 16) and a shorter surgical time (MD: - 15.14 min, 95% CI - 21.28 to - 9.00).
CONCLUSIONS
With more advantages, the suprapatellar approach may be the preferred nailing technique over the infrapatellar approach when treating distal tibial fractures.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level III, systematic review of non-randomized studies.
Topics: Humans; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Bone Nails; Tibial Fractures; Pain; Operative Time
PubMed: 37041367
DOI: 10.1186/s10195-023-00694-7 -
Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and... Sep 2022Tibial fractures are common long bone injuries, often surgically fixed with intramedullary nails. Modern intramedullary tibial nails allow for two different fixation...
INTRODUCTION
Tibial fractures are common long bone injuries, often surgically fixed with intramedullary nails. Modern intramedullary tibial nails allow for two different fixation modes, namely static and dynamic modes. While studies have demonstrated benefits of using either fixation modes, there has been no consensus as to which fixation mode would produce better outcomes and less complications. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety of dynamic versus static fixation of intramedullary nails in the operative fixation of tibial diaphyseal fractures.
METHODS
A meta-analysis was conducted with a multi-database search (PubMed, OVID, EMBASE, Medline) according to PRISMA guidelines on April 15, 2021. Data from all published literature meeting inclusion criteria were extracted and analysed with fixed- and random-effects models.Findings/results: A total of 478 statically fixed and 234 dynamically fixed patients were included in this meta-analysis. Dynamically fixed patients had a significantly shorter mean time to union (mean difference, MD = 5.18 weeks, 95%CI: 1.95-8.41 weeks, p = 0.002) and reoperation rates (OR = 0.21, 95%CI: 0.10-0.47, p < 0.001) than statically fixed patients. No significant difference was found between both groups in terms of malrotation (OR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.07-4.41, p = 0.59), non-union (OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.24-5.05, p = 0.91), delayed union (OR = 1.15, 95%CI: 0.19-7.17, p = 0.88) and malunion (OR = 2.73, 95% CI: 0.29-25.26, p = 0.38).
CONCLUSION
While acknowledging that there is widespread surgeon preference to dyanamise or statically fix intramedullary nails in certain tibial fracture configurations, primary dynamic fixation of intramedullary tibial nails demonstrated significantly shorter times to bony union and less complications than static nailing in our meta-analysis. Further research on identifying patient factors and fracture patterns that would best benefit from dynamic fixation is required.
PubMed: 35942323
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2022.101941 -
Medicine Sep 2023Studies of clinical outcomes that compare the elastic stable intramedullary nail (ESIN) with the submuscular plate (SMP) were controversial. The meta-analysis was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Elastic stable intramedullary nail fixation versus submuscular plate fixation of pediatric femur shaft fractures in school age patients: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Studies of clinical outcomes that compare the elastic stable intramedullary nail (ESIN) with the submuscular plate (SMP) were controversial. The meta-analysis was performed to summarize existing evidence, aiming to determine whether ESIN was superior to SMP in pediatric femur shaft fractures.
METHODS
Search strategies followed the recommendations of the Cochrane collaboration. Electronic searches such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane were systematically searched for publications concerning ESIN and SMP from the inception date to March 2023. Two investigators independently searched, screened, and reviewed the full text of the article. Disagreements generated throughout the process were resolved by consensus, and if divergences remain, they were arbitrated by a third author.
RESULTS
This study included 8 articles, comprising a total of 561 patients with a similar baseline. Compared to the SMP, the ESIN had shorter operation time (mean difference = -16.16; 95% CI = -22.83 to -9.48, P < .00001), and less intraoperative blood loss (mean difference = -53.62; 95% CI = -58.89 to -48.36, P < .00001), but had a higher incidence of implant irritation (odds ratio [OR] = 6.49; 95% CI = 3.01 to 13.98, P < .0001), lower limb malalignment (OR = 2.60; 95% CI = 1.12 to 6.04, P = .96) and overall complications(OR = 4.14; 95% CI = 2.51 to 6.84, P < .0001). And there was no significant difference in radiation time, length of hospital stay, limb length discrepancy, infection rate, delayed union rate and unplanned revised surgery rate (P > .05).
CONCLUSIONS
Compared to the SMP, the ESIN offers shorter operative time, and less blood loss. However, the SMP is superior to ESINs in complication rates, especially regarding implant irritation and malalignment. Both methods could achieve excellent satisfactory functional outcomes. Thus, the SMP is an alternative choice in the pediatric femur shaft fracture.
Topics: Humans; Child; Femoral Fractures; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Bone Plates; Blood Loss, Surgical; Femur; Bone Nails; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37773849
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035287 -
Injury Nov 2022The treatment of infected non-unions of the femur and the tibia remains difficult and requires control of the infection and successful bone healing. Antimicrobial...
The treatment of infected non-unions of the femur and the tibia remains difficult and requires control of the infection and successful bone healing. Antimicrobial coating of intramedullary nails promises both infection control and stabilization for subsequent bone healing. Both results for custom-made and commercially available antimicrobial coating for intramedullary nails have been published in the past mainly consisting of retrospective case series. The purpose of this work is to review the published literature on techniques and clinical outcome of antimicrobial coatings for intramedullary nails for the treatment of infected long bone non-unions. A systematic literature research in Medline, PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library was performed in accordance to the PRISMA guidelines. Articles reporting on antimicrobial-coated intramedullary nails for the treatment of infected long bone non-unions were eligible for inclusion. In total, 22 publications were found reporting on 506 infected non-unions of the tibia and femur treated with an antimicrobial-coated nail. Most of them consisted of retrospective case series (72.7%). 469 and 37 patients were treated with an individual antibiotic-loaded PMMA-coating and commercially available gentamicin-coating for intramedullary nails, respectively. The overall infection eradication rate was 90.0% (range 68.7-100%) and the bone consolidation rate was 85.5% (range 57.9-100%). Coating specific side effects were not reported. In conclusion, the treatment of infected long bone non-unions with antimicrobial-coated nails is associated with a high infection control and bone consolidation rate and seems to be a reasonable treatment options with minimal side effects. However, scientific quality of the publications is low and randomized controlled trials are needed.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bone Nails; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Fracture Healing; Gentamicins; Humans; Polymethyl Methacrylate; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35613970
DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.05.008 -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... Mar 2024The aim of this systematic review was to compare extramedullary fixation and intramedullary fixation for AO type 31-A2 trochanteric fractures in the elderly, with regard... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to compare extramedullary fixation and intramedullary fixation for AO type 31-A2 trochanteric fractures in the elderly, with regard to functional outcomes, complications, surgical outcomes, and costs.
METHODS
Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. Results are presented as weighted risk ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI).
RESULTS
Fourteen RCTs (2039 patients) and 13 observational studies (22,123 patients) were included. Statistically superior results in favor of intramedullary fixation were found for Harris Hip Score (MD 4.09, 95% CI 0.91-7.26, p = 0.04), Parker mobility score (MD - 0.67 95% CI - 1.2 to - 0.17, p = 0.009), lower extremity measure (MD - 4.07 95% CI - 7.4 to - 0.8, p = 0.02), time to full weight bearing (MD 1.14 weeks CI 0.92-1.35, p < 0.001), superficial infection (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.18-3.58, p = 0.01), nonunion (RR 3.67, 95% CI 1.03-13.10, p = 0.05), fixation failure (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.16-4.44, p = 0.02), leg shortening (MD 2.23 mm, 95% CI 0.81-3.65, p = 0.002), time to radiological bone healing (MD 2.19 months, 95% CI 0.56-3.83, p = 0.009), surgery duration (MD 11.63 min, 95% CI 2.63-20.62, p = 0.01), operative blood loss (MD 134.5 mL, 95% CI 51-218, p = 0.002), and tip-apex distance > 25 mm (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.10-2.74, p = 0.02). No comparable cost/costs-effectiveness data were available.
CONCLUSION
Current literature shows that several functional outcomes, complications, and surgical outcomes were statistically in favor of intramedullary fixation when compared with extramedullary fixation of AO/OTA 31-A2 fractures. However, as several of the differences found appear not to be clinically relevant and for many outcomes data remains sparse or heterogeneous, complete superiority of IM fixation for AO type 31-A2 fractures remains to be confirmed in a detailed cost-effectiveness analysis.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Bone Nails; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Hip Fractures; Fracture Fixation, Internal
PubMed: 38175213
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-023-05138-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019Mammalian bites are a common presentation in emergency and primary healthcare facilities across the world. The World Health Organization recommends postponing the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Mammalian bites are a common presentation in emergency and primary healthcare facilities across the world. The World Health Organization recommends postponing the suturing of a bite wound but this has not been evaluated through a systematic review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of primary closure compared with delayed closure or no closure for mammalian bite wounds.
SEARCH METHODS
In July 2019 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials which compared primary closure with delayed or no closure for traumatic wounds due to mammalian bite.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full-text publications, applied the inclusion criteria, and extracted data. We pooled data using a random-effects model, as appropriate. We used the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We found three trials (878 participants) that compared primary closure with no closure for dog bites and one trial (120 participants) that compared primary closure with delayed closure. No other mammalian bite studies were identified. The trials were from the UK (one trial), Greece (one trial) and China (two trials). Overall, participants from both sexes and all age groups were represented. We are uncertain whether primary closure improves the proportion of wounds which are infection-free compared with no closure, as the certainty of evidence for this outcome was judged to be very low (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.05; 2 studies, 782 participants; I = 0%). We downgraded the evidence by one level for high risk of bias and two levels for imprecision. There is no clinically important difference in cosmesis (acceptable physical/cosmetic appearance) of dog bite wounds when primary closure is compared with no closure (mean difference (MD) -1.31, 95% CI -2.03 to -0.59; 1 study, 182 participants). The certainty of evidence for this outcome was judged to be moderate (we downgraded our assessment by one level for imprecision). We are uncertain whether primary closure improves the proportion of dog bite wounds that are infection-free compared with delayed closure, as the evidence for this outcome was judged to be very low (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; 1 study, 120 participants; I = 0%). We downgraded the evidence by one level for high risk of bias and two levels for imprecision. None of the four trials reported any adverse outcomes such as death or rabies but they were, in any case, unlikely to have been large enough to have satisfactory power to provide precise estimates for these. Important outcomes like time to complete wound healing, proportion of wounds healed, and length of hospital stay were not evaluated.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
All the studies we identified concerned dog bites. There is no high-certainty evidence to support or refute existing recommendations concerning primary closure for dog bites. The potential benefits and harms of primary closure compared with delayed or no closure for mammalian bites remain uncertain and more robust trials are needed.
Topics: Bites and Stings; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Soft Tissue Injuries; Wound Healing; Wound Infection
PubMed: 31805611
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011822.pub2 -
Defining the role of intramedullary nailing for fractures of the distal radius: a systematic review.The Bone & Joint Journal Oct 2015This article is a systematic review of the published literature about the biomechanics, functional outcome and complications of intramedullary nailing of fractures of... (Review)
Review
This article is a systematic review of the published literature about the biomechanics, functional outcome and complications of intramedullary nailing of fractures of the distal radius. We searched the Medline and EMBASE databases and included all studies which reported the outcome of intramedullary (IM) nailing of fractures of the distal radius. Data about functional outcome, range of movement (ROM), strength and complications, were extracted. The studies included were appraised independently by both authors using a validated quality assessment scale for non-controlled studies and the CONSORT statement for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The search strategy revealed 785 studies, of which 16 were included for full paper review. These included three biomechanical studies, eight case series and five randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The biomechanical studies concluded that IM nails were at least as strong as locking plates. The clinical studies reported that IM nailing gave a comparable ROM, functional outcome and grip strength to other fixation techniques. However, the mean complication rate of intramedullary nailing was 17.6% (0% to 50%). This is higher than the rates reported in contemporary studies for volar plating. It raises concerns about the role of intramedullary nailing, particularly when comparative studies have failed to show that it has any major advantage over other techniques. Further adequately powered RCTs comparing the technique to both volar plating and percutaneous wire fixation are needed.
Topics: Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Hand Strength; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Radius Fractures; Range of Motion, Articular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26430012
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B10.35297 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2020Fracture of the distal radius is a common clinical problem. A key method of surgical fixation is percutaneous pinning, involving the insertion of wires through the skin... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Fracture of the distal radius is a common clinical problem. A key method of surgical fixation is percutaneous pinning, involving the insertion of wires through the skin to stabilise the fracture. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2007.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of percutaneous pinning versus cast immobilisation alone and of different methods and techniques of percutaneous pinning, modalities or duration of immobilisation after pinning, and methods or timing of pin or wire removal for treating fractures of the distal radius in adults. Our primary focus was on dorsally displaced fractures.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, trial registers, conference proceedings and reference lists of articles up to June 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled clinical trials involving adults with a fracture of the distal radius, which compared percutaneous pinning with non-surgical treatment or different aspects of percutaneous pinning. Our main outcomes were patient-reported function at the short term (up to three months), medium term (three up to 12 months) and long term (greater than 12 months); overall numbers of participants with complications requiring secondary treatment and any complication; grip strength and health-related quality of life at 12 months.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently performed study screening and selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction. We pooled data where appropriate and used GRADE for assessing the quality of evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and five quasi-RCTs, involving 1946 generally older and female adults with dorsally displaced and potentially or evidently unstable distal radial fractures. Trial populations varied but the majority of studies reported mean ages in the sixth decade or older. All trials were at high risk of bias, invariably performance bias - which for most trials reflected the impracticality of blinding care providers or participants to treatment allocation - and often detection bias and selective reporting bias. Allocation concealment was secure in one trial only. All trials reported outcomes incompletely. The studies tested one of 10 comparisons. In the following, we report on those of the main outcomes for which evidence was available. No subgroup analysis, such as by pinning methods, was viable. Eleven heterogeneous trials involving 917 participants compared percutaneous pinning with plaster cast immobilisation after closed reduction of the fracture. The quality of the evidence was very low for all reported outcomes. Thus, we are uncertain if percutaneous pinning compared with plaster cast alone makes any difference to patient-reported function, measured using the DASH questionnaire, at six weeks or six months (incomplete data from one trial). Overall numbers of participants with complications were not reported. Redisplacement resulting in secondary treatment occurred on average in 12% (range 3.3% to 75%) of participants treated by cast alone (six trials) whereas pin tract infection requiring antibiotics and, often, early wire removal, occurred on average in 7.7% (range 0% to 15%) of pinning group participants (seven trials). We are uncertain whether pinning makes a difference to the incidence of complex regional pain syndrome, reported in four studies. Although two studies found finger stiffness after cast removal was less common after pinning (20% versus 36%), the treatment implications were not reported. Other reported complications were mainly surgery-related. Based on incomplete data or qualitative statements from only four studies, we are uncertain of the effects of pinning on grip strength at 12 months. We are uncertain if percutaneous pinning compared with plaster cast alone makes any difference to patient-reported quality of life at four months (one study). Five comparisons of different pinning methods were made by six trials in all. One of these trials, which reported results for 96 participants, compared Kapandji intrafocal pinning (2 or 3 wires) with early mobilisation versus trans-styloid fixation (2 wires) with six weeks cast immobilisation. We are uncertain whether Kapandji pinning slightly increases the risk of superficial radial nerve symptoms or complex regional pain syndrome, or whether it makes a difference in grip strength at 12 months (very low-quality evidence). Two small trials using two distinct pinning techniques compared biodegradable pins versus metal pins in 70 participants. Although very low-quality evidence, the extra demands at surgery of insertion of biodegradable pins and excess of serious complications (e.g. severe osteolytic reactions) associated with biodegradable material are important findings. Three poorly-reported trials involving 168 participants compared burying of wire ends versus leaving them exposed. We are uncertain whether burying of wires reduces the incidence of superficial infection (very low-quality evidence). There is low-quality evidence that burying of wires may be associated with a higher risk of requiring more invasive treatment for wire removal. Four small trials compared different types or duration of postoperative immobilisation. Very low-quality evidence of small between-group differences in individual complications and grip strength at 17 weeks, means we are uncertain of the effects of positioning the wrist in dorsiflexion versus palmar flexion during cast immobilisation following pinning of redisplaced fractures (one trial; 60 participants). Three small heterogeneous trials compared cast immobilisation for one week (early mobilisation) versus four or six weeks after percutaneous pinning in 170 people. Although we note one trial using Kapandji pinning reported more complications in the early group, the very low-quality evidence means there is uncertainty of the effects of early mobilisation on overall and individual complications, or grip strength at 12 months. No trials tested different methods for, or timing of, pin/wire removal.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, there is insufficient RCT evidence to inform on the role of percutaneous pinning versus cast immobilisation alone or associated treatment decisions such as method of pinning, burying or not of wire ends, wrist position and duration of immobilisation after pinning. Although very low-quality evidence, the serious complications associated with biodegradable materials is noteworthy. We advise waiting on the results of a large ongoing study comparing pinning with plaster cast treatment as these could help inform future research.
Topics: Bone Nails; Bone Wires; Casts, Surgical; Colles' Fracture; Fracture Fixation; Humans; Radius Fractures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Wrist Injuries
PubMed: 32032439
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006080.pub3