-
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Aug 2023The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of the Ilizarov method in the treatment of radius and ulna bone defects. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of the Ilizarov method in the treatment of radius and ulna bone defects.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, and Scopus databases were searched for articles published up to May 2023. The quality of the studies was evaluated using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The effect size and confidence intervals at 95% for the main results were calculated. The heterogeneity was evaluated. The demographic data, defect size (DS), external fixation time (EFT), external fixation index (EFI), and complications were extracted and analyzed using the Stata version 16.
RESULTS
This meta-analysis identified and included seven studies involving 98 patients. The union rate of 100% was reported in all studies. According to the findings of the single-arm meta-analysis, the pooled DS was 3.42 cm (95% CI [2.64, 4.21], I = 53.5%, P = 0.045), EFT was 148.43 days (95% CI [97.49, 199.38], I = 91.9%, P = 0.000), and EFI was 41.32 days/cm (95% CI [35.72, 46.91], I = 62.2%, P = 0.021). Pin tract infection was the most common complication, as reported in six studies.
CONCLUSION
The findings of the present meta-analysis indicate that the Ilizarov technique is a successful treatment option for bone defects in the radius and ulna. This method has demonstrated efficacy in achieving expected clinical outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Radius; Ilizarov Technique; Upper Extremity; Databases, Factual; Ulna
PubMed: 37649069
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04126-4 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and... Aug 2023Internal fixation with cephalomedullary nails has been widely used in the treatment of intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFF). Yet, the difference in efficacy and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Internal fixation with cephalomedullary nails has been widely used in the treatment of intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFF). Yet, the difference in efficacy and safety between the commonly used integrated dual-screw cephalomedullary nail (InterTAN) and single-screw cephalomedullary nail remains inconclusive. Thus we performed the present systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies comparing InterTAN with proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA), the Asian PFNA (PFNA-II), or the Gamma3 nail in treating IFF were searched on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library from inception to April 30, 2023. The differences in perioperative parameters and clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated by mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95%CI). The risks of various complications and mortality were assessed by risk ratio (RR) with 95%CI.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies comprising 3566 patients were included. Compared with single-screw cephalomedullary nails (PFNA/PFNA-II, Gamma3), InterTAN conferred significantly reduced risk of implant failures (RR = 0.37, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.51, P < 0.001), hip and thigh pain (RR = 0.70, 95%CI 0.55 to 0.90, P = 0.006) and all-cause revision/reoperation (RR = 0.38, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.57, P < 0.001). Moreover, patients treated with InterTAN had significantly higher 1-year Harris Hip Score (MD = 0.82, 95%CI 0.20-1.44, P = 0.010) and shorter time to union/healing (MD = - 0.66 days, 95%CI - 1.16 to - 0.16, P = 0.009). Femoral neck shortening, time to full bearing, and incidences of non-union, infection, deep venous thrombosis, and mortality were comparable between both groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The integrated dual-screw InterTAN construct has superior performance in reducing risks of complications and improving clinical and functional outcomes in the treatment of IFF. More well-designed, high-quality RCTs are warranted to confirm these findings.
Topics: Humans; Hip Fractures; Femur Neck; Wound Healing; Bone Screws; Femur
PubMed: 37599361
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04103-x -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Jul 2023Nonunion (NU) is one of the most feared complications of femoral shaft fracture treatment. Femoral shaft fracture treatment is often linked with poor bone stock and... (Review)
Review
Nonunion (NU) is one of the most feared complications of femoral shaft fracture treatment. Femoral shaft fracture treatment is often linked with poor bone stock and reduced bone metabolism. In this paper, the goal is to carefully analyze the best treatment options for patients who developed nonunion after the intramedullary nailing of a femoral shaft fracture. A systematic review of the literature available in the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochran library databases was carried out, and 16 studies were included. Exclusion criteria included case reports and case series that do not have data about clinical outcomes or functional outcomes and included fewer than 10 patients. The reviewed data provide evidence for very good results about the treatment of this pathology with exchanging intramedullary nails or the implantation of a plate and screws (general healing rate of 96.3%). Moreover, the data support the utilization of autologous bone graft in order to stimulate the healing process. In conclusion, the choice between these two types of treatment must be guided by the type of pseudarthrosis that the patient presents. Additionally, bone grafting or growth factors promote bone regenerative processes, especially in patients with oligo-atrophic pseudoarthrosis.
PubMed: 37511883
DOI: 10.3390/life13071508 -
International Orthopaedics Dec 2023Tibial shaft fractures are the most common type of long-bone fractures. External fixation (EF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) are widely used surgical techniques for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
Tibial shaft fractures are the most common type of long-bone fractures. External fixation (EF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) are widely used surgical techniques for the definitive fixation of open tibial shaft fractures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare EF to IMN for the definitive fixation of open tibial fractures.
METHODS
Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched for eligible studies. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared EF to IMN for skeletally mature adults with open tibial fracture (Gustilo I, II, and III). We evaluated the following outcomes: superficial infection, pin-track infection, deep infection, malunion, nonunion, delayed union, and implant/hardware failure. The risk ratio (RR) was used to represent the desired outcomes. The statistical analysis was performed using the random-effects model.
RESULTS
A total of 12 RCTs that enrolled 1090 participants were deemed eligible for the analysis. EF showed a significantly higher rate of superficial infection, pin track infection, and malunion compared to IMN (RR = 2.30, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.34 to 3.95; RR = 13.52, 95% CI: 6.16 to 29.66; RR = 2.29, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.73, respectively). No substantial difference was found between EF and IMN in terms of deep infection, nonunion, delayed union, or implant/hardware failure (RR = 1.15, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.98; RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.10; RR = 1.50, 95% CI 0.98 to 3.33; RR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.60, respectively).
DISCUSSION
The findings of our meta-analysis are consistent with the previous systematic reviews excepts for the implant/hardware failure which was found to be significant in favour of IMN by one of the previous reviews.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis confirms that IMN is better than EF with respect to clinical outcomes and complication rate for the definitive fixation of open tibial fracture.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tibial Fractures; Fractures, Open; Odds Ratio; Treatment Outcome; Fracture Fixation; Bone Nails
PubMed: 37491610
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-023-05879-7 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Nov 2023
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Tibia; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Tibial Fractures; Bone Nails; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37479660
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2023.07.054 -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... Oct 2023Fractures of the proximal femur accompanied by a fracture of the femoral shaft are relatively rare, with a reported prevalence between 1 and 12%. Multiple surgical...
INTRODUCTION
Fractures of the proximal femur accompanied by a fracture of the femoral shaft are relatively rare, with a reported prevalence between 1 and 12%. Multiple surgical options are available, consisting of treatment with a single implant or with double implants. Controversy exists about the optimal management. A systematic review and pooled analysis were performed to assess the most reliable treatment for bifocal femoral fractures of the femur.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A literature search was conducted on July 15, 2022. Selected studies were screened on title and abstract by two researchers independently, and full texts were read by both authors. Emphasis was put on adverse events such as postoperative infection, healing complications, malalignment, and functional outcome using either a single implant or double implants.
RESULTS
For the proximal femoral fractures, no significant difference could be confirmed for avascular necrosis of the femoral neck (5.1% for single implant and 3.8% for double implants), nonunion (6.4% for single implant and 7.8% for double implants), or varus malalignment (6.6% for single implant and 10.9% for double implants). This study also suggests that the number of implants is irrelevant for complications of the femoral shaft regarding the rates of postoperative infection and healing complications. Pooled rates of bone healing complications were 1.6-2.7-fold higher when patients were treated with a single implant, but statistical significance could not be confirmed. For hardware failure, revision surgery, leg length discrepancy, and functional outcome, no difference between the two groups was found either.
CONCLUSIONS
The pooled proportions of all postoperative complications had overlapping confidence intervals; thus, no inference about a statistically significant difference on the number of implants used for treating ipsilateral fractures of the femur can be made. Both treatment groups showed a similar functional outcome at the last moment of follow-up, with more than 75% of the patients reporting a good outcome.
Topics: Humans; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Bone Nails; Femoral Fractures; Femur; Postoperative Complications; Fracture Healing; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37405462
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-023-04950-7 -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... Aug 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis compared extramedullary fixation and intramedullary fixation for stable two-part trochanteric femoral fractures (AO type 31-A1)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis compared extramedullary fixation and intramedullary fixation for stable two-part trochanteric femoral fractures (AO type 31-A1) with regards to functional outcomes, complications, and surgical outcomes.
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 were presented as weighted risk ratio (RR) or weighted mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI).
RESULTS
Five RCTs (397 patients) and 14 observational studies (21,396 patients) were included. No significant differences in functional outcomes, complications, or surgical outcomes were found between extramedullary and intramedullary fixation devices, except for a difference in duration of surgery (MD 14.1 min, CI 5.76-22.33, p < 0.001) and intra-operative blood loss (MD 92.30 mL, CI 13.49-171.12, p = 0.02), favoring intramedullary fixation.
CONCLUSION
Current literature shows no meaningful differences in complications, surgical, or functional outcomes between extramedullary and intramedullary fixation of stable two-part trochanteric femoral fractures. Both treatment options result in good outcomes. This study implicates that, costs should be taken into account when considering implants or comparing fixation methods in future research.
Topics: Humans; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Bone Nails; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Bone Screws; Hip Fractures
PubMed: 37129692
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-023-04902-1 -
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery... Oct 2023Tibio-talo-calcaneal arthrodesis (TTCA) is considered a safe and valuable option for end-stage tibiotalar and subtalar arthritis, and usually is performed with a... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Tibio-talo-calcaneal arthrodesis (TTCA) is considered a safe and valuable option for end-stage tibiotalar and subtalar arthritis, and usually is performed with a retrograde intramedullary nail. Although the good results reported, potential complications may be related to retrograde nail entry point. Aim of this systematic review is to analyze in cadaveric studies the risk of iatrogenic injuries related to different entry points and different retrograde intramedullary nail design when performing TTCA.
METHODS
According to PRISMA, a systematic review of the literature was performed on PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases. A subgroup analysis comparing different entry point location (anatomical or fluoroscopic guided) and different nail design (straight vs. valgus curved nails) was performed.
RESULTS
Five studies were included, for a total of 40 specimens. Superiority of anatomical landmark-guided entry points was observed. Different nail designs did not seem to influence nor iatrogenic injuries neither hindfoot alignment.
CONCLUSION
Retrograde intramedullary nail entry point should be placed in the lateral half of the hindfoot in order to minimize the risk of iatrogenic injuries.
Topics: Humans; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies; Bone Nails; Arthrodesis; Iatrogenic Disease; Ankle Joint
PubMed: 36906879
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-023-03512-2 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Dec 2023To report the statistical stability of prospective clinical trials evaluating the effect of intramedullary reaming on rates of non-union in tibial fractures through...
PURPOSE
To report the statistical stability of prospective clinical trials evaluating the effect of intramedullary reaming on rates of non-union in tibial fractures through calculation of the fragility metrics for non-union rates and all other dichotomous outcomes.
METHODS
Literature search was conducted for prospective clinical trials evaluating the effect of intramedullary reaming on non-union rates in tibial nailing. All dichotomous outcomes were extracted from the manuscripts. The fragility index (FI) and reverse fragility index (RFI) were calculated by determining the number of event reversals required for a statistically significant outcome to lose significance and vice-versa. The fragility quotient (FQ) and reverse fragility quotient (RFQ) were calculated by dividing the FI or RFI by the sample size, respectively. Outcomes were defined as "fragile" if the FI or RFI was found to be less than or equal to the number of patients lost to follow-up.
RESULTS
Literature search identified 579 results which produced ten studies meeting the criteria for review. There were 111 outcomes identified for analysis, of which 89 (80%) exhibited statistical fragility. For reported outcomes across the studies the median and mean FI was 2, the median FQ was 0.019, the mean FQ was 0.030, the median RFI was 4, the mean RFI was 3.95, the median RFQ was 0.045, and the mean RFQ was 0.030. Four studies reported outcomes which were found to have an FI of 0.
CONCLUSIONS
The studies evaluating the effect of intramedullary reaming on tibial nail fixation demonstrate considerable fragility. On average, two event reversals for significant findings, and four event reversals for insignificant findings are sufficient to alter statistical significance.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level II, systematic review of Level I and Level II studies.
Topics: Humans; Treatment Outcome; Prospective Studies; Bone Nails; Tibia; Tibial Fractures; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary
PubMed: 36879152
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-023-02254-4 -
International Orthopaedics Dec 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of open- versus closed-reduction and intramedullary nailing (IMN) of adult femur shaft fractures. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of open- versus closed-reduction and intramedullary nailing (IMN) of adult femur shaft fractures.
METHODS
Four databases were searched from inception until July 2022 for original studies that compared the outcomes of IMN following open-reduction versus closed-reduction technique. The primary outcome was the union rate; the secondary outcomes were time to union, nonunion, malalignment, revision, and infection. This review was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines.
RESULTS
A total of 12 studies with 1299 (1346 IMN cases) patients were included, with a mean age of 32.3 ± 3.25. The average follow-up was 2.3 ± 1.45 years. There was a statistically significant difference in union rate (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.45-0.97; p-value, 0.0352), nonunion (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.23-3.44; p-value, 0.0056), and infection rate (OR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.16-3.25; p-value, 0.0114) between the open-reduction and closed-reduction groups in favour of the latter. However, malalignment was significantly higher in the closed-reduction group (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.16-0.64; p-value, 0.0012), whereas time to union and revision rates were similar (p = NS).
CONCLUSION
This study showed that closed-reduction and IMN had more favourable union rate, nonunion, and infection rates than the open-reduction group, yet malalignment was significantly less in the open-reduction group. Moreover, time to union and revision rates were comparable. However, these results must be interpreted in context due to confounding effects and the lack of high-quality studies.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Femoral Fractures; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary; Open Fracture Reduction; Reoperation; Bone Nails; Femur; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies; Fracture Healing; Fractures, Open
PubMed: 36864184
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-023-05740-x