Cargando…
Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses
Although a serious of meta-analyses have been published to compare the effects of internal versus external fixation (IF vs EF) for treating distal radial fractures (DRF), no consensus was obtained. By performing a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing IF versus EF for the treatmen...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4782889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26945405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002945 |
_version_ | 1782420033595506688 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Qingyu Liu, Fanxiao Xiao, Zhenyun Li, Zhenfeng Wang, Bomin Dong, Jinlei Han, Yong Zhou, Dongsheng Li, Jianmin |
author_facet | Zhang, Qingyu Liu, Fanxiao Xiao, Zhenyun Li, Zhenfeng Wang, Bomin Dong, Jinlei Han, Yong Zhou, Dongsheng Li, Jianmin |
author_sort | Zhang, Qingyu |
collection | PubMed |
description | Although a serious of meta-analyses have been published to compare the effects of internal versus external fixation (IF vs EF) for treating distal radial fractures (DRF), no consensus was obtained. By performing a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing IF versus EF for the treatment of distal radial fractures, we attempted to evaluate the methodology and reporting quality of these meta-analyses, interpret the source of discordant results, and therefore determine the dominant strategy for the treatment of distal radial fractures based on the best evidence currently. An electronic databases search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library to retrieve meta-analyses comparing IF versus EF for treating DRF. Reference lists of relevant literatures were also screened manually to retrieve additional ones. Two investigators independently assessed the eligibility of retrieved articles using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. All characteristics as well as outcome variables including functional outcomes, range of motion, radiological results, and complication rates with relevant heterogeneity information presented in each included study were extracted. Heterogeneity was thought to be significant when I(2) > 50%. We adopted the Oxford Levels of Evidence and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) Instrument to assess the methodological quality of every included study, and applied the Jadad decision algorithm to select studies with more likely reliable conclusions. A total of 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. The AMSTAR scores ranged from 5 to 9 with a median of 7.75. Following the Jadad algorithm, the meta-analyses with most reliable results can be selected based on the search strategies and application of selection. Finally, 2 meta-analyses with most RCTs and highest AMSTAR scores were selected in this systematic review of overlapping meta-analysis. The best available evidence suggested that compared with EF, IF was significantly associated with lower Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores, better rehabilitation of volar tilt and radial inclination, and lower infection rate at 1-year follow-up. Therefore, we could conclude that internal fixation is superior to external fixations for the treatment of distal radial fractures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4782889 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47828892016-03-24 Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses Zhang, Qingyu Liu, Fanxiao Xiao, Zhenyun Li, Zhenfeng Wang, Bomin Dong, Jinlei Han, Yong Zhou, Dongsheng Li, Jianmin Medicine (Baltimore) 7100 Although a serious of meta-analyses have been published to compare the effects of internal versus external fixation (IF vs EF) for treating distal radial fractures (DRF), no consensus was obtained. By performing a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing IF versus EF for the treatment of distal radial fractures, we attempted to evaluate the methodology and reporting quality of these meta-analyses, interpret the source of discordant results, and therefore determine the dominant strategy for the treatment of distal radial fractures based on the best evidence currently. An electronic databases search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library to retrieve meta-analyses comparing IF versus EF for treating DRF. Reference lists of relevant literatures were also screened manually to retrieve additional ones. Two investigators independently assessed the eligibility of retrieved articles using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. All characteristics as well as outcome variables including functional outcomes, range of motion, radiological results, and complication rates with relevant heterogeneity information presented in each included study were extracted. Heterogeneity was thought to be significant when I(2) > 50%. We adopted the Oxford Levels of Evidence and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) Instrument to assess the methodological quality of every included study, and applied the Jadad decision algorithm to select studies with more likely reliable conclusions. A total of 8 studies met the inclusion criteria. The AMSTAR scores ranged from 5 to 9 with a median of 7.75. Following the Jadad algorithm, the meta-analyses with most reliable results can be selected based on the search strategies and application of selection. Finally, 2 meta-analyses with most RCTs and highest AMSTAR scores were selected in this systematic review of overlapping meta-analysis. The best available evidence suggested that compared with EF, IF was significantly associated with lower Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores, better rehabilitation of volar tilt and radial inclination, and lower infection rate at 1-year follow-up. Therefore, we could conclude that internal fixation is superior to external fixations for the treatment of distal radial fractures. Wolters Kluwer Health 2016-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4782889/ /pubmed/26945405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002945 Text en Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
spellingShingle | 7100 Zhang, Qingyu Liu, Fanxiao Xiao, Zhenyun Li, Zhenfeng Wang, Bomin Dong, Jinlei Han, Yong Zhou, Dongsheng Li, Jianmin Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses |
title | Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses |
title_full | Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses |
title_fullStr | Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses |
title_full_unstemmed | Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses |
title_short | Internal Versus External Fixation for the Treatment of Distal Radial Fractures: A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses |
title_sort | internal versus external fixation for the treatment of distal radial fractures: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses |
topic | 7100 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4782889/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26945405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002945 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangqingyu internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT liufanxiao internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT xiaozhenyun internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT lizhenfeng internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT wangbomin internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT dongjinlei internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT hanyong internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT zhoudongsheng internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses AT lijianmin internalversusexternalfixationforthetreatmentofdistalradialfracturesasystematicreviewofoverlappingmetaanalyses |