...
首页> 外文期刊>Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica >Intramedullary versus extramedullary fixation in the treatment of subtrochanteric femur fractures: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Intramedullary versus extramedullary fixation in the treatment of subtrochanteric femur fractures: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:髓内与髓外固定在治疗子系统转子股骨骨折中:综合系统审查和荟萃分析

获取原文

摘要

OBJECTIVE:This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of intramedullary fixation with the extramedullary fixation in the surgical management of subtrochanteric fractures by analyzing relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies (RCSs).METHODS:The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Wanfang database, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched from their inception till June 29, 2020. Two reviewers extracted the data, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, fluoroscopy time, length of stay, union time, nonunion rate, infection rate, implant failure rate, reoperation rate, Harris hip score, and mortality rate. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale were used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs and RCSs, respectively. Statistical heterogeneity was quantitatively evaluated with the I2 statistic.RESULTS:There were no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, average length of stay in hospital, infection rate, implant failure rate, Harris hip scores, and mortality rate. Intramedullary nail could achieve shorter union time (MD=-1.77, 95% CI -3.40~-0.14, p=0.03), lower nonunion rate (RR=0.36, 95%CI 0.14~0.97, p=0.04), and reoperation rate (RR=0.46, 95% CI 0.24~0.89, p=0.02) than extramedullary fixations. The subgroup analysis indicated that intramedullary nail was superior than extramedullary fixations in operation time, reoperation rate, and Harris hip scores in the ≥60-year subgroup. However, the intraoperative blood loss in intramedullary nail group was significantly higher than that of extramedullary fixation group in the 60-year subgroup.CONCLUSION:The results of this study have revealed that intramedullary fixation can confer shorter union time, lower nonunion, and reoperation rates compared with extramedullary fixations. Therefore, intramedullary fixation should be considered as the first selection for the treatment of patients with subtrochanteric fractures.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level II, Therapeutic study.
机译:目的:该荟萃分析旨在通过分析相关随机对照试验(RCT)和回顾性队列研究(RCSS),将髓内固定与髓内固定的临床结果进行比较,以与次转子分子骨折的外科治疗中的髓外固定。方法:PUBMED,EMBASE,从20020年6月29日开始搜查了Cochrane图书馆,万方数据库和中国国家知识基础设施(CNKI)。两位审稿人提取了数据,包括操作时间,术中失血,透明时间,逗留时间,愈合时间,非金翁速率,感染率,植入物失败率,再置换率,哈里斯髋关节得分和死亡率。 Cochrane偏倚工具和纽卡斯尔 - 渥太华质量评估规模分别用于评估RCT和RCSS的方法论质量。用I2统计量定量评估统计异质性。结果:操作时间没有显着差异,医院,感染率,植入失败率,哈里斯阶层和死亡率。髓内钉可以达到更短的联合时间(MD = -1.77,95%CI -3.40〜-0.14,P = 0.03),较低的非阴性速率(RR = 0.36,95%CI 0.14〜0.97,P = 0.04)和重组率(RR = 0.46,95%CI 0.24〜0.89,p = 0.02)比髓外固定。亚组分析表明,诱因钉在≥60年亚组中的运作时间,重组率和哈里斯髋关节评分中的仿生固定优势。然而,髓内钉组的术中失血显着高于<60岁亚组的髓质固定组。结论:本研究的结果揭示了髓内固定可以赋予较短的联合时间,较低的undution和重新进食与髓外固定相比的费率。因此,髓内固定应被视为治疗子转子间骨折治疗患者的第一个选择。证据velvel:II级,治疗研究。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号