Antegrade vs Retrograde Intra-Medullary Nailing in Femoral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.2 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Mohammad Daher, Jean Tarchichi, Ziad Zalaquett, Jack C Casey, Joe Ghanimeh, Jad Mansour
{"title":"Antegrade vs Retrograde Intra-Medullary Nailing in Femoral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Mohammad Daher, Jean Tarchichi, Ziad Zalaquett, Jack C Casey, Joe Ghanimeh, Jad Mansour","doi":"10.22038/ABJS.2024.78871.3623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Femoral shaft fractures are one of the most prevalent fractures found in clinical practice. Numerous operative and non-operative options are readily available for the treatment of such fractures with intra-medullary nailing being the gold standard. To date, no consensus has been reached favoring one approach over the other. Thus, this meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes between an antegrade and retrograde intra-medullary nailing for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar (page 1-20), and Embase were searched till January 2024. The clinical outcomes evaluated were the incidence of adverse events, reoperations, hip and knee pain, and surgery-related parameters.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Higher rates of hip pain, and heterotopic ossification (p=0.0003, and p=0.0002 respectively) was observed with antegrade nailing. However, a higher rate of knee pain (p=0.02) was appreciated in retrograde nailing. There was no statistically significant difference in the remaining analyzed outcomes such as operative time, reoperation rate or other complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite a higher rate of heterotopic ossification using the antegrade nailing technique, both the antegrade and retrograde nailing techniques yield overall similar outcomes. Therefore, the decision to choose one or the other should be based on patient-related factors, and the surgeon's experience and preference.</p>","PeriodicalId":46704,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery-ABJS","volume":"12 8","pages":"535-545"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11353144/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery-ABJS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/ABJS.2024.78871.3623","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Femoral shaft fractures are one of the most prevalent fractures found in clinical practice. Numerous operative and non-operative options are readily available for the treatment of such fractures with intra-medullary nailing being the gold standard. To date, no consensus has been reached favoring one approach over the other. Thus, this meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes between an antegrade and retrograde intra-medullary nailing for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures.

Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar (page 1-20), and Embase were searched till January 2024. The clinical outcomes evaluated were the incidence of adverse events, reoperations, hip and knee pain, and surgery-related parameters.

Results: Higher rates of hip pain, and heterotopic ossification (p=0.0003, and p=0.0002 respectively) was observed with antegrade nailing. However, a higher rate of knee pain (p=0.02) was appreciated in retrograde nailing. There was no statistically significant difference in the remaining analyzed outcomes such as operative time, reoperation rate or other complications.

Conclusion: Despite a higher rate of heterotopic ossification using the antegrade nailing technique, both the antegrade and retrograde nailing techniques yield overall similar outcomes. Therefore, the decision to choose one or the other should be based on patient-related factors, and the surgeon's experience and preference.

股骨柄骨折髓内钉顺行钉与逆行钉的对比:系统回顾与元分析》。
目的:股骨干骨折是临床上最常见的骨折之一。目前治疗此类骨折的手术和非手术方法很多,其中髓内钉是金标准。迄今为止,还没有达成一种方法优于另一种方法的共识。因此,本荟萃分析旨在比较前向髓内钉和后向髓内钉治疗股骨干骨折的效果:方法:检索了PubMed、Cochrane、Google Scholar(第1-20页)和Embase,检索期至2024年1月。评估的临床结果包括不良事件发生率、再次手术、髋关节和膝关节疼痛以及手术相关参数:结果:观察到前行钉的髋关节疼痛和异位骨化发生率较高(分别为P=0.0003和P=0.0002)。然而,逆行钉的膝关节疼痛发生率更高(P=0.02)。其余分析结果如手术时间、再次手术率或其他并发症均无统计学差异:结论:尽管逆行钉技术的异位骨化率较高,但逆行钉技术和顺行钉技术的总体疗效相似。因此,应根据患者相关因素、外科医生的经验和偏好来决定选择其中一种。
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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
128
期刊介绍: The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery (ABJS) aims to encourage a better understanding of all aspects of Orthopedic Sciences. The journal accepts scientific papers including original research, review article, short communication, case report, and letter to the editor in all fields of bone, joint, musculoskeletal surgery and related researches. The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery (ABJS) will publish papers in all aspects of today`s modern orthopedic sciences including: Arthroscopy, Arthroplasty, Sport Medicine, Reconstruction, Hand and Upper Extremity, Pediatric Orthopedics, Spine, Trauma, Foot and Ankle, Tumor, Joint Rheumatic Disease, Skeletal Imaging, Orthopedic Physical Therapy, Rehabilitation, Orthopedic Basic Sciences (Biomechanics, Biotechnology, Biomaterial..).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信