Early weight-bearing following distal femur fracture fixation - a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Andrea S Aebischer, Conor J C Gouk, Richard Steer
{"title":"Early weight-bearing following distal femur fracture fixation - a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Andrea S Aebischer, Conor J C Gouk, Richard Steer","doi":"10.1111/ans.19288","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The global standard of care for hip fracture surgery is early weight-bearing, but this has not extended to other lower extremity fractures in the elderly. Patients undergoing fixation of distal femur fractures are often prescribed weight-bearing restrictions, which may lead to deconditioning and other complications. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and complication rates between patients permitted early versus restricted weight-bearing following distal femur fracture fixation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched for English language articles up to 21 October 2023, identifying 366 studies for screening. Comparative studies evaluating patients undergoing distal femur fracture fixation with early or restricted weight-bearing were included. Native knee and periprosthetic fractures were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies were included for analysis. Two studies provided Level II evidence, while the remaining eight studies provided Level III evidence. Cochrane risk of bias tools were utilized to assess study quality. Revision and complication rates were analyzed and reported as odds ratio. Sub-analysis was undertaken to address the heterogeneity in author definitions of weight-bearing. There was no statistically significant difference in the revision or complication rate between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Early weight-bearing following distal femur fracture fixation in a predominantly elderly population does not demonstrate an increased rate of revision or complications compared to restricted weight-bearing. However, there are limitations to the available literature, and the strength of the findings is insufficient to provide strong recommendations for all patients. Future studies should employ standardized definitions and avoid partial or time-based restrictions.</p>","PeriodicalId":8158,"journal":{"name":"ANZ Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ANZ Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.19288","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The global standard of care for hip fracture surgery is early weight-bearing, but this has not extended to other lower extremity fractures in the elderly. Patients undergoing fixation of distal femur fractures are often prescribed weight-bearing restrictions, which may lead to deconditioning and other complications. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and complication rates between patients permitted early versus restricted weight-bearing following distal femur fracture fixation.

Methods: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched for English language articles up to 21 October 2023, identifying 366 studies for screening. Comparative studies evaluating patients undergoing distal femur fracture fixation with early or restricted weight-bearing were included. Native knee and periprosthetic fractures were included.

Results: Ten studies were included for analysis. Two studies provided Level II evidence, while the remaining eight studies provided Level III evidence. Cochrane risk of bias tools were utilized to assess study quality. Revision and complication rates were analyzed and reported as odds ratio. Sub-analysis was undertaken to address the heterogeneity in author definitions of weight-bearing. There was no statistically significant difference in the revision or complication rate between the two groups.

Conclusion: Early weight-bearing following distal femur fracture fixation in a predominantly elderly population does not demonstrate an increased rate of revision or complications compared to restricted weight-bearing. However, there are limitations to the available literature, and the strength of the findings is insufficient to provide strong recommendations for all patients. Future studies should employ standardized definitions and avoid partial or time-based restrictions.

股骨远端骨折固定术后早期负重--系统回顾与荟萃分析。
导言:髋部骨折手术的全球护理标准是早期负重,但这一标准并未扩展到其他老年人下肢骨折。接受股骨远端骨折固定术的患者通常会被限制负重,这可能会导致患者体质下降和其他并发症。本研究旨在比较股骨远端骨折固定术后允许患者早期负重与限制负重的结果和并发症发生率:对 Medline、Embase、Cochrane 和 Web of Science 数据库中截至 2023 年 10 月 21 日的英文文章进行了检索,共筛选出 366 项研究。纳入了对接受股骨远端骨折固定术的患者进行早期或限制性负重评估的比较研究。结果:结果:共纳入 10 项研究进行分析。其中两项研究提供了二级证据,其余八项研究提供了三级证据。利用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估研究质量。对翻修率和并发症发生率进行了分析,并以几率比的形式进行了报告。针对作者对负重定义的异质性进行了子分析。两组的翻修率和并发症发生率在统计学上没有明显差异:结论:在以老年人为主的人群中,股骨远端骨折固定术后早期负重与限制负重相比,并不会增加翻修率或并发症发生率。然而,现有文献存在局限性,研究结果的力度不足以为所有患者提供有力的建议。未来的研究应采用标准化的定义,并避免部分或基于时间的限制。
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
ANZ Journal of Surgery
ANZ Journal of Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
720
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: ANZ Journal of Surgery is published by Wiley on behalf of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons to provide a medium for the publication of peer-reviewed original contributions related to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of surgery and related disciplines. It also provides a programme of continuing education for surgeons. All articles are peer-reviewed by at least two researchers expert in the field of the submitted paper.
×
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