Intramedullary fixation versus plate fixation in the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q2 SURGERY

Frontiers in Surgery Pub Date : 2024-07-11 DOI:10.3389/fsurg.2023.1194050

Minpeng Lu, Hao Qiu, Yuting Liu, Jing Dong, Lingfang Jiang

{"title":"Intramedullary fixation versus plate fixation in the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","authors":"Minpeng Lu, Hao Qiu, Yuting Liu, Jing Dong, Lingfang Jiang","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2023.1194050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the clinical efficacy of intramedullary fixation (IF) vs. plate fixation (PF) in the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures.MethodsWe conducted a computerized search of the electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Medlineand Chinese Journal Full-text Database) from the establishment of the database to the end of November 2022. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's “Risk of bias”. Comparisons between the two groups were based on 8 variables, including Constant score, disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score, surgery time, length of incision, hospital stay; time to union, blood loss and infection.ResultsThirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising a total of 928 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that IF can benefit midshaft clavicle fractures with a reduced surgery time and hospital stay, a smaller incision, a better shoulder function (DASH score), shorter time to union and lower rate of infection compared with PF. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of Constant score at 12-month follow-up.ConclusionIF is superior to PF for the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures.","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1194050","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the clinical efficacy of intramedullary fixation (IF) vs. plate fixation (PF) in the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures.MethodsWe conducted a computerized search of the electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Medlineand Chinese Journal Full-text Database) from the establishment of the database to the end of November 2022. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's “Risk of bias”. Comparisons between the two groups were based on 8 variables, including Constant score, disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score, surgery time, length of incision, hospital stay; time to union, blood loss and infection.ResultsThirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising a total of 928 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that IF can benefit midshaft clavicle fractures with a reduced surgery time and hospital stay, a smaller incision, a better shoulder function (DASH score), shorter time to union and lower rate of infection compared with PF. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of Constant score at 12-month follow-up.ConclusionIF is superior to PF for the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures.

查看原文本刊更多论文

髓内固定与钢板固定治疗锁骨中轴骨折：随机对照试验荟萃分析

目的本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估髓内固定（IF）与钢板固定（PF）治疗锁骨中轴骨折的临床疗效。方法我们对自数据库建立至2022年11月底的电子数据库（PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、Medline和中文期刊全文数据库）进行了计算机检索。纳入研究的质量根据 Cochrane 协作组织的 "偏倚风险 "进行评估。两组间的比较基于8个变量，包括Constant评分、手臂、肩部和手部残疾（DASH）评分、手术时间、切口长度、住院时间、伤口愈合时间、失血量和感染。汇总结果显示，与PF相比，IF能缩短手术时间和住院时间，切口更小，肩关节功能更好（DASH评分），愈合时间更短，感染率更低。结论 IF 在治疗锁骨中轴骨折方面优于 PF。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Frontiers in Surgery Medicine-Surgery

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

11.10%

发文量

1872

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles. Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery. Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact. The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.