Cargando…

Outcomes of early versus delayed weight-bearing with intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE: Early weight bearing (EWB) is often recommended after intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures, however, the risks and benefits have not been critically evaluated in a systematic review or meta-analysis. Therefore, the aims of this study were to perform a systematic review and meta-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bhanushali, Ameya, Kovoor, Joshua G., Stretton, Brandon, Kieu, James T., Bright, Rebecca A., Hewitt, Joseph N., Ovenden, Christopher D., Gupta, Aashray K., Afzal, Mohamed Z., Edwards, Suzanne, Jaarsma, Ruurd L., Graff, Christy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9532312/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35238986
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-01919-w
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Early weight bearing (EWB) is often recommended after intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures, however, the risks and benefits have not been critically evaluated in a systematic review or meta-analysis. Therefore, the aims of this study were to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing EWB and delayed weight-bearing (DWB) after intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures and assess the relationship between weight-bearing, fracture union and healing. METHOD: This review included studies comparing the effects of EWB, defined as weight-bearing before 6 weeks, and DWB on fracture union and healing. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 9 May 2021. Risk of bias was assessed using the Down’s and Black Checklist and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Data were synthesised in a meta-analysis, as well as narrative and tabular synthesis. RESULTS: Eight studies were included for data extraction and meta-analysis. The analysis produced mixed results and found a significant decrease in mean union time (−2.41 weeks, 95% confidence interval: −4.77, −0.05) with EWB and a significant Odd’s Ratio (OR) for complications with DWB (OR: 2.93, 95% CI: 1.40, 6.16). There was no significant difference in rates of delayed union, non-union, re-operation and malunion. CONCLUSION: The included studies were of moderate risk of bias and demonstrated shorter union time and fewer complications with EWB. However, current evidence is minimal and has significant limitations. The role of EWB in high-risk patients is yet to be examined. Further well-designed, randomised studies are required on the topic. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00068-022-01919-w.