-
Medicine Nov 2019Hand fractures are the second most common upper-extremity fractures. The standard X-ray has shortcomings, such as exposure to radiation. Ultrasound has been reported as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUNDS
Hand fractures are the second most common upper-extremity fractures. The standard X-ray has shortcomings, such as exposure to radiation. Ultrasound has been reported as an alternative method of detecting hand fractures. In this study, we used meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic value of ultrasound for hand fractures.
METHODS
Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relative citations up to June 2019. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were estimated.
RESULTS
Seven studies including 842 participants (845 examined hands) met our inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, and NLR of ultrasound for detecting hand fractures were 91%, 96%, 20.66, and 0.09, respectively. The pooled DOR was 231.17, indicating a very powerful diagnostic ability of ultrasound. Meta-regression showed that there was no heterogeneity with respect to age, cut-off, the performer of the ultrasound, and the types of hand fractures.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results showed that ultrasound had an excellent diagnostic value for hand fractures. In clinic, we proposed using ultrasound as a first-line and radiation-free modality in detecting hand fractures, including phalanx and metacarpal fractures.
Topics: Finger Phalanges; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Metacarpal Bones; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 31689869
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000017823 -
Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand... Feb 2024This review was performed to systematically compare the effectiveness and safety of the first dorsal metacarpal artery flaps (FDMAF) and reverse homodigital dorsal flaps... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
This review was performed to systematically compare the effectiveness and safety of the first dorsal metacarpal artery flaps (FDMAF) and reverse homodigital dorsal flaps (RHDF) for thumb reconstruction.
METHODS
All literatures, which compared FDMAF versus RHDF for thumb reconstruction, were acquired through a comprehensive search in multiple databases from inception until 31st August 2022. A meta-analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS
A total of 19 articles were retrieved, comprising 396 patients in the FDMAF group and 423 patients in the RHDF group. The pooled estimates suggested that there were no significant differences in venous congestion, complications about flap necrosis and reduced range of motion (ROM) of thumb, static 2-point discrimination (S-2PD) between the two groups. On the other hand, patients in the RHDF group had less vascular crisis (odds ratio [OR] = 3.15, 95%CI, 1.31-7.56), complications about poor cortical reorientation (OR = 440.02, 95%CI, 91.97-2105.27) and higher satisfaction rate (OR = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.33-0.96) than those in the FDMAF group.
CONCLUSIONS
The two surgical procedures were both safe and reliable since no significant differences were found in flap necrosis between the two groups. However, the patients in the RHDF group had less complications about vascular crisis, poor cortical reorientation and higher satisfaction rate. Accordingly, we thought RHDF may be more superior for thumb reconstruction than FDMAF.
Topics: Humans; Thumb; Metacarpal Bones; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Arteries; Necrosis
PubMed: 38407389
DOI: 10.2340/jphs.v59.12435