Cargando…

Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

A number of meta-analyses have compared clinical outcomes following plate vs. intramedullary fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures (MSCF), but with conflicting results. There is a requirement for updated level-1 evidence to guide clinicians managing MSCF. The aim of the present systematic review...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ju, Weina, Mohamed, Sayid Omar, Qi, Baochang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: D.A. Spandidos 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7401851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32765773
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9002
_version_ 1783566643793756160
author Ju, Weina
Mohamed, Sayid Omar
Qi, Baochang
author_facet Ju, Weina
Mohamed, Sayid Omar
Qi, Baochang
author_sort Ju, Weina
collection PubMed
description A number of meta-analyses have compared clinical outcomes following plate vs. intramedullary fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures (MSCF), but with conflicting results. There is a requirement for updated level-1 evidence to guide clinicians managing MSCF. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare clinical outcomes following plate vs. intramedullary fixation of MSCF. The PubMed, Scopus, BioMed Central, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar databases were searched for records added until 1st July 2019. A total of 10 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Shoulder function was assessed using the Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome questionnaire and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH). There was no statistically significant difference in Constant-Murley scores between plate and intramedullary fixation [Mean difference (MD)=0.75; 95% CI: -2.49 to 3.99; P=0.65; I(2)=85%]. Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in DASH scores between the two groups (MD=1.55; 95% CI: -1.12 to 4.23; P=0.26; I(2)=89%). There was no statistically significant difference in complications requiring non-routine surgery between plate and intramedullary fixation [risk ratio (RR)=1.80, 95%CI: 0.80-4.05, P=0.15; I(2)=0%]. There was an increased risk of complications that did not require non-routine surgery with plate fixation as compared to intramedullary fixation (RR=2.38, 95%CI: 1.22-4.62, P=0.01; I(2)=70%). Plate fixation was also associated with an increased risk of infection and complications of cosmetic dissatisfaction. The present results indicated no difference in long-term functional outcomes between plate and intramedullary fixation of MSCF. Plate fixation was associated with an increased risk of complications not requiring non-routine surgery. Further high-quality RCTs shall strengthen the evidence on this subject.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7401851
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher D.A. Spandidos
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74018512020-08-05 Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Ju, Weina Mohamed, Sayid Omar Qi, Baochang Exp Ther Med Articles A number of meta-analyses have compared clinical outcomes following plate vs. intramedullary fixation for midshaft clavicle fractures (MSCF), but with conflicting results. There is a requirement for updated level-1 evidence to guide clinicians managing MSCF. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare clinical outcomes following plate vs. intramedullary fixation of MSCF. The PubMed, Scopus, BioMed Central, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar databases were searched for records added until 1st July 2019. A total of 10 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Shoulder function was assessed using the Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome questionnaire and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH). There was no statistically significant difference in Constant-Murley scores between plate and intramedullary fixation [Mean difference (MD)=0.75; 95% CI: -2.49 to 3.99; P=0.65; I(2)=85%]. Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in DASH scores between the two groups (MD=1.55; 95% CI: -1.12 to 4.23; P=0.26; I(2)=89%). There was no statistically significant difference in complications requiring non-routine surgery between plate and intramedullary fixation [risk ratio (RR)=1.80, 95%CI: 0.80-4.05, P=0.15; I(2)=0%]. There was an increased risk of complications that did not require non-routine surgery with plate fixation as compared to intramedullary fixation (RR=2.38, 95%CI: 1.22-4.62, P=0.01; I(2)=70%). Plate fixation was also associated with an increased risk of infection and complications of cosmetic dissatisfaction. The present results indicated no difference in long-term functional outcomes between plate and intramedullary fixation of MSCF. Plate fixation was associated with an increased risk of complications not requiring non-routine surgery. Further high-quality RCTs shall strengthen the evidence on this subject. D.A. Spandidos 2020-09 2020-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7401851/ /pubmed/32765773 http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9002 Text en Copyright: © Ju et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Articles
Ju, Weina
Mohamed, Sayid Omar
Qi, Baochang
Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_full Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_fullStr Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_short Comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_sort comparison of plate fixation vs. intramedullary fixation for the management of mid-shaft clavicle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7401851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32765773
http://dx.doi.org/10.3892/etm.2020.9002
work_keys_str_mv AT juweina comparisonofplatefixationvsintramedullaryfixationforthemanagementofmidshaftclaviclefracturesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT mohamedsayidomar comparisonofplatefixationvsintramedullaryfixationforthemanagementofmidshaftclaviclefracturesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT qibaochang comparisonofplatefixationvsintramedullaryfixationforthemanagementofmidshaftclaviclefracturesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials