-
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Jul 2021The aim of systematic review and meta-analysis was to find out whether minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) is better than open reduction and internal plate... (Review)
Review
Is Minimally Invasive Plating Osteosynthesis Better Than Conventional Open Plating for Humeral Shaft Fractures? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.
INTRODUCTION
The aim of systematic review and meta-analysis was to find out whether minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) is better than open reduction and internal plate fixation (ORIF) in terms of functional outcome, achieving union (union time and incidence of non-union), intraoperative parameters (surgical duration, blood loss, and radiation exposure), and complications (iatrogenic radial nerve palsy and infection) for humeral shaft fractures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
We searched online databases (Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and The Cochrane Library) from inception till 3rd September 2020 for articles comparing MIPO with ORIF for humeral shaft fractures. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was done by Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tool 2 (RoB2) and of non-randomized studies (case-control and cohort studies) by Methodological Index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software.
RESULTS
11 studies (5 RCTs and 6 non-randomized comparative studies) involving a total of 582 patients (MIPO-290, ORIF-292) meeting our inclusion criteria were included in the study. There was no statistically significant difference in pooled analysis of functional outcome scores between MIPO and ORIF. Union time was significantly lesser (mean difference = 3.12 weeks) and incidence of non-union lower (odd's ratio = 0.27) in MIPO group. Surgical duration and intraoperative blood loss were significantly lesser in MIPO group. Iatrogenic radial nerve palsy and infection were higher in ORIF group.
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed that MIPO gives similar functional outcomes as compared to ORIF but causes significantly lesser blood loss, requires lesser operative duration and has a lesser incidence of major complications.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO)-CRD42020208346, Date of registration 09/10/2020.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-021-00413-6.
PubMed: 34306542
DOI: 10.1007/s43465-021-00413-6 -
Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and... Apr 2021To analyze the available literature pertaining to the indications, outcomes, and complications of both microfracture (MFX) and simple debridement for capitellar... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To analyze the available literature pertaining to the indications, outcomes, and complications of both microfracture (MFX) and simple debridement for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans (OCD).
METHODS
A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Studies were included if they evaluated OCD of the capitellum that underwent either arthroscopic debridement (AD) or MFX. The risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) scale. Patient demographic characteristics, imaging findings, return-to-sport rates, patient-reported outcomes, range of motion (ROM), complications, failures, and reoperations were recorded.
RESULTS
Eleven studies with 327 patients (332 elbows) met the inclusion criteria. Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) scores ranged from 63% to 75% and showed considerable heterogeneity. Both AD and MFX showed improvement in patient outcome scores, ROM, and return to play, although the data precluded relative conclusions. Improvement in motion after MFX ranged from 4.9° to 5° of flexion, 5° to 22.6° of extension, 1° to 2° of pronation, and 0.5° to 2° of supination, whereas after AD, it ranged from -4° to 6° of flexion and -0.4° to 14° of extension, with prono-supination noted in only 1 study. The rate of return to play at a similar level of preinjury athletic competition ranged from 55% to 75% after MFX and from 40% to 100% after AD. Lesion location was discussed in only 1 study. Postoperative imaging trended toward early degenerative changes, most commonly of the radial head. Complications were only reported in 1 MFX study; in all cases, the complication was transient ulnar nerve neurapraxia. Reoperation rates ranged from 0% to 10%, and reoperation was most commonly performed to address radial head enlargement. Five studies reported no reoperations.
CONCLUSIONS
Both AD and MFX for capitellar OCD appear to yield excellent improvements in pain, ROM, patient outcome scores, and return to sport. Given that comparable mid-term outcomes can be achieved with debridement alone, without the use of MFX, similarly to recent prospective studies in the knee, AD alone may be a reasonable approach to relatively small OCD defects.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV, systematic review of studies, all Level IV evidence.
PubMed: 34027472
DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2020.10.002 -
PloS One 2021People with ulnar, radial or median nerve injuries can present significant impairment of their sensory and motor functions. The prescribed treatment for these conditions... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
People with ulnar, radial or median nerve injuries can present significant impairment of their sensory and motor functions. The prescribed treatment for these conditions often includes electrophysical therapies, whose effectiveness in improving symptoms and function is a source of debate. Therefore, this systematic review aims to provide an integrative overview of the efficacy of these modalities in sensorimotor rehabilitation compared to placebo, manual therapy, or between them.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We perform a literature review in the following databases: Biomed Central, Ebscohost, Lilacs, Ovid, PEDro, Sage, Scopus, Science Direct, Semantic Scholar, Taylor & Francis, and Web of Science, for the period 1980-2020. We include studies that discussed the sensorimotor rehabilitation of people with non-degenerative ulnar, radial, or median nerve injury. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Risk of Bias Tool described in the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the risk of bias across studies with the GRADE approach described in the GRADE Handbook.
RESULTS
Thirty-eight studies were included in the systematic review and 34 in the meta-analysis. The overall quality of evidence was rated as low or very low according to GRADE criteria. Low-level laser therapy and ultrasound showed favourable results in improving symptom severity and functional status compared to manual therapy. In addition, the low level laser showed improvements in pinch strength compared to placebo and pain (VAS) compared to manual therapy. Splints showed superior results to electrophysical modalities. The clinical significance of the results was assessed by effect size estimation and comparison with the minimum clinically important difference (MCID).
CONCLUSIONS
We found favourable results in pain relief, improvement of symptoms, functional status, and neurophysiological parameters for some electrophysical modalities, mainly when applied with a splint. Our results coincide with those obtained in some meta-analyses. However, none of these can be considered clinically significant.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number CRD42020168792; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=168792.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Humans; Median Neuropathy; Neuralgia; Pain Measurement; Radial Neuropathy; Splints; Treatment Outcome; Ulnar Neuropathies
PubMed: 33735212
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0248484 -
Medicinski Glasnik : Official... Feb 2021Aim To report clinical, functional and radiographic results of oneincision distal biceps tendon repair with Toggle Loc (Zimmer-Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana, USA) at an...
Aim To report clinical, functional and radiographic results of oneincision distal biceps tendon repair with Toggle Loc (Zimmer-Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana, USA) at an average 4-year follow-up and to assess posterior interosseous nerve injury complications after reconstruction. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of 58 consecutive distal biceps tendon repairs performed at our department between 2010 and 2018. Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scale and elbow range of motion (ROM) were recorded at each follow-up and an ultrasound examination was also performed to assess the repaired biceps brachii tendon. Results Clinical evaluation showed good and excellent results at medium- and long-term follow-up. A temporary posterior interosseous nerve (PIN) palsy developed in four (6.81%) patients and always resolved in 8 weeks. PIN palsy prevalence is in accordance with the results of the previous studies. Conclusion Distal biceps tendon repair with Toggle Loc is an effective surgical procedure. PIN injury is a relatively rare complication after one-incision anterior repair. Our complication rate did not differ significantly from other studies that have used cortical button fixation, reported in current literature. Our results confirm that accidental injury of PIN may also happen to experienced surgeons and suggest extreme care and an appropriate surgical technique to reduce this iatrogenic risk.
Topics: Elbow; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Rupture; Tendon Injuries; Tendons; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33480223
DOI: 10.17392/1303-21 -
Cureus Nov 2020Radial nerve palsies in closed humeral shaft fractures are common, with an incidence of 7%-17%. The management of radial nerve palsies in closed fractures is often... (Review)
Review
Radial nerve palsies in closed humeral shaft fractures are common, with an incidence of 7%-17%. The management of radial nerve palsies in closed fractures is often expectant, with 70.7% spontaneously recovering within six months. A literature search was conducted for studies on radial nerve palsies in humeral shaft fractures from 2000-2018. A total of 4972 humeral shaft fractures were identified, with an incidence of 12.2% of primary radial nerve palsies. During the exploration, no neurological intervention was performed in nearly 41% of cases, and the most common finding was no evidence of any nerve lesion (35%). Those who underwent neurolysis were more likely to resolve when compared to primary repair or nerve grafting. Overall, there was a high rate of spontaneous radial nerve palsy recovery (85%) with radial nerve exploration increasing rates of resolution. While exploration demonstrates increased resolution, it is yet to be determined which fractures are indicated for nerve exploration.
PubMed: 33335819
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.11490 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.... Sep 2020Brachial plexus and axillary nerve injuries often result in paralysis of the deltoid muscle. This can be functionally debilitating for patients and have a negative...
BACKGROUND
Brachial plexus and axillary nerve injuries often result in paralysis of the deltoid muscle. This can be functionally debilitating for patients and have a negative impact on their activities of daily living. In these settings, transferring the branch of the radial nerve innervating the triceps to the axillary nerve is a viable treatment option. Additional nerve transfers may be warranted. This study sought to determine the efficacy of nerve transfer procedures in the setting of brachial plexus and axillary nerve injuries and factors affecting clinical outcomes.
METHODS
The U.S. National Library of Medicine's website "PubMed" was queried for "radial to axillary nerve transfer" and "brachial plexus nerve transfer." An initial review by two authors was performed to identify relevant articles followed by a third author validation utilizing inclusion and exclusion criteria. Individual patient outcomes were recorded and pooled for final analysis.
RESULTS
Of the 80 patients, 66 (82.5%) had clinical improvement after surgical nerve transfer procedures. Significant difference in clinical improvement following nerve transfer procedures was correlated with patient age, mechanism of injury, brachial plexus vs isolated axillary nerve injuries, multiple nerve transfers vs single nerve transfers, and surgery within the first 7 months of injury. The branch of the radial nerve supplying the triceps long head showed improved clinical results compared with the branch of the radial nerve supplying the triceps medial head and anconeus.
CONCLUSION
Nerve transfers have been shown to be effective in restoring shoulder abduction in both isolated axillary nerve injuries and brachial plexus injuries.
PubMed: 33133948
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000003096 -
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma... Apr 2021Humeral shaft fractures are often associated with radial nerve palsy (RNP) (8-16%). The primary aim of this systematic review was to assess the incidence of primary and...
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Humeral shaft fractures are often associated with radial nerve palsy (RNP) (8-16%). The primary aim of this systematic review was to assess the incidence of primary and secondary RNP in closed humeral shaft fractures. The secondary aim was to compare the recovery rate of primary RNP and the incidence of secondary RNP between operative and non-operative treatment.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in 'Trip Database', 'Embase' and 'PubMed' to identify original studies reporting on RNP in closed humeral shaft fractures. The Coleman Methodology Score was used to grade the quality of the studies. The incidence and recovery of RNP, fracture characteristics and treatment characteristics were extracted. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to compare operative versus non-operative treatment.
RESULTS
Forty studies reporting on 1758 patients with closed humeral shaft fractures were included. The incidence of primary RNP was 10%. There was no difference in the recovery rate of primary RNP when comparing operative treatment with radial nerve exploration (98%) versus non-operative treatment (91%) (p = 0.29). The incidence of secondary RNP after operative and non-operative treatment was 4% and 0.4%, respectively (p < 0.01).
INTERPRETATION
One-in-ten patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture has an associated primary RNP, of which > 90% recovers without the need of (re-)intervention. No beneficial effect of early exploration on the recovery of primary RNP could be demonstrated when comparing patients managed non-operatively with those explored early. Patients managed operatively for closed humeral shaft fractures have a higher risk of developing secondary RNP.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV; Systematic Review.
Topics: Humans; Humeral Fractures; Incidence; Radial Neuropathy
PubMed: 32285189
DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03446-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2020Shock wave therapy has seen widespread use since the 1990s to treat various musculoskeletal disorders including rotator cuff disease, but evidence of its efficacy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Shock wave therapy has seen widespread use since the 1990s to treat various musculoskeletal disorders including rotator cuff disease, but evidence of its efficacy remains equivocal.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits and harms of shock wave therapy for rotator cuff disease, with or without calcification, and to establish its usefulness in the context of other available treatment options.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP up to November 2019, with no restrictions on language. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved trials to identify potentially relevant trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) that used quasi-randomised methods to allocate participants, investigating participants with rotator cuff disease with or without calcific deposits. We included trials of comparisons of extracorporeal or radial shock wave therapy versus any other intervention. Major outcomes were pain relief greater than 30%, mean pain score, function, patient-reported global assessment of treatment success, quality of life, number of participants experiencing adverse events and number of withdrawals due to adverse events.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. The primary comparison was shock wave therapy compared to placebo.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty-two trials (2281 participants) met our inclusion criteria. Most trials (25) included participants with rotator cuff disease and calcific deposits, five trials included participants with rotator cuff disease and no calcific deposits, and two trials included a mixed population of participants with and without calcific deposits. Twelve trials compared shock wave therapy to placebo, 11 trials compared high-dose shock wave therapy (0.2 mJ/mm² to 0.4 mJ/mm² and above) to low-dose shock wave therapy. Single trials compared shock wave therapy to ultrasound-guided glucocorticoid needling, ultrasound-guided hyaluronic acid injection, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), no treatment or exercise; dual session shock wave therapy to single session therapy; and different delivery methods of shock wave therapy. Our main comparison was shock wave therapy versus placebo and results are reported for the 3 month follow up. All trials were susceptible to bias; including selection (74%), performance (62%), detection (62%), and selective reporting (45%) biases. No trial measured participant-reported pain relief of 30%. However, in one trial (74 participants), at 3 months follow up, 14/34 participants reported pain relief of 50% or greater with shock wave therapy compared with 15/40 with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62 to 1.94); low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). Mean pain (0 to 10 scale, higher scores indicate more pain) was 3.02 points in the placebo group and 0.78 points better (0.17 better to 1.4 better; clinically important change was 1.5 points) with shock wave therapy (9 trials, 608 participants), moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for bias). Mean function (scale 0 to 100, higher scores indicate better function) was 66 points with placebo and 7.9 points better (1.6 better to 14 better, clinically important difference 10 points) with shock wave therapy (9 trials, 612 participants), moderate-quality evidence (downgraded for bias). Participant-reported success was reported by 58/150 people in shock wave therapy group compared with 35/137 people in placebo group (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.91; 6 trials, 287 participants), low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). None of the trials measured quality of life. Withdrawal rate or adverse event rates may not differ between extracorporeal shock wave therapy and placebo, but we are uncertain due to the small number of events. There were 11/34 withdrawals in the extracorporeal shock wave therapy group compared with 13/40 withdrawals in the placebo group (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.31; 7 trials, 581 participants) low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision); and 41/156 adverse events with extracorporeal shock wave therapy compared with 10/139 adverse events in the placebo group (RR 3.61, 95% CI 2.00 to 6.52; 5 trials, 295 participants) low-quality evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision). Subgroup analyses indicated that there were no between-group differences in pain and function outcomes in participants who did or did not have calcific deposits in the rotator cuff.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the currently available low- to moderate-certainty evidence, there were very few clinically important benefits of shock wave therapy, and uncertainty regarding its safety. Wide clinical diversity and varying treatment protocols means that we do not know whether or not some trials tested subtherapeutic doses, possibly underestimating any potential benefits. Further trials of extracorporeal shock wave therapy for rotator cuff disease should be based upon a strong rationale and consideration of whether or not they would alter the conclusions of this review. A standard dose and treatment protocol should be decided upon before further research is conducted. Development of a core set of outcomes for trials of rotator cuff disease and other shoulder disorders would also facilitate our ability to synthesise the evidence.
Topics: Calcinosis; Exercise Therapy; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Hyaluronic Acid; Middle Aged; Muscular Diseases; Patient Dropouts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rotator Cuff; Shoulder Pain; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Viscosupplements
PubMed: 32128761
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008962.pub2 -
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 -
Journal of Orthopaedics 2020Forearm fractures are common injuries among children and adolescents. Traditionally, they were managed conservatively with closed reduction and cast immobilization. The... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Forearm fractures are common injuries among children and adolescents. Traditionally, they were managed conservatively with closed reduction and cast immobilization. The last decade there is an increasing trend towards operative treatment. The treatment modalities available include plate and screws, flexible intramedullary nailing and external fixation devices - rarely used nowadays. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the indications of flexible intramedullary nailing in the childhood population, to compare its results with plating and to provide detailed information considering technical pitfalls and complications that may be encountered.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
An extensive search was performed in the electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE) from their inception up to June 2019 in order articles relevant to this review to be retrieved. The search terms used were the following: forearm fracture, both-bone fracture, pediatric, nailing, fixation. 56 articles were considered suitable for inclusion.
RESULTS
The indications for surgery are unstable and irreducible fractures, open and fractures with neurovascular compromise. As far as the fracture site is concerned, radius and ulna shaft fractures, radial head and Monteggia fractures are suitable for nailing.Although plates and nailing have comparable clinical outcomes and complication rates, flexible intramedullary nailing has the advantage of smaller incisions, less tissue disruption, shorter operative and hospital times and an ease in hardware removal.Controversy exists over the need of single or double nailing in both-bone fractures of the forearm. In addition, there is no consensus as to which is the preferred nail diameter. Yet, all the authors agree that open reduction must be considered after certain failed closed reductions in order compartment syndrome to be avoided.Flexible intramedullary nailing is not complication-free. Skin irritation, Extensor Pollicis Longus rupture, superficial radial nerve injury, delayed union or even nonunion, malunion and refractures are some of the complications that may be encountered.
DISCUSSION
Flexible nails are excellent implants combining stability and elasticity. The procedure of passing the nails across radius and ulna is relatively simple, requiring a small learning curve. Flexible intramedullary nailing is an excellent treatment modality for the treatment of forearm fractures in children and adolescents.
PubMed: 32025135
DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2020.01.002