Finding the optimal treatment model: a systematic review and meta- analysis of manipulative interventions following failed initial treatment of radial head subluxation in children.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
RuiLing Xu, ShengHu Zhou, QingSong Tang, XinLing Miao, YingEr He, Xiang Ren, Kang Zhao, Jie Hu
{"title":"Finding the optimal treatment model: a systematic review and meta- analysis of manipulative interventions following failed initial treatment of radial head subluxation in children.","authors":"RuiLing Xu, ShengHu Zhou, QingSong Tang, XinLing Miao, YingEr He, Xiang Ren, Kang Zhao, Jie Hu","doi":"10.1186/s12891-024-08089-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The hyperpronation (HP) maneuver, known for its high success rate in reducing radial head subluxation after initial treatment failure, has gained significant favor among surgeons over the traditional supination-flexion (SF) maneuver. Despite its perceived advantages, the optimal treatment approach remains a topic of debate in the medical community due to uncertainties surrounding repeat and crossover reduction outcomes. Further research and clinical assessments are needed to establish a definitive treatment protocol ensuring optimal patient outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the efficacy of HP and SF maneuvers following unsuccessful initial treatments for radial head subluxation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A thorough search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to May 13, 2024 was conducted. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool evaluated study quality, and RevMan 5.3 facilitated systematic review calculations. Subgroup analyses explored reasons for heterogeneity by considering second reduction attempts with crossover and repeat maneuvers. Sensitivity analyses using fixed and random effects models were performed for ambiguous decisions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nine studies with 170 patients were analyzed. The success rate for the second reduction was significantly higher with HP (OR = 2.48, 95% CI 1.18 to 5.20, P = 0.02) compared to SF. Repeat maneuver success rate for the second reduction also favored HP (OR = 3.79, 95% CI 1.57 to 9.16, P<0.01). However, no significant difference was found in the success rate of the crossover maneuver for the second reduction (OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.47, P = 0.71).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The initial reduction method was unclear, possibly favoring HP over SF following initial treatment failure for radial head subluxation in children. When the initial reduction technique is clear, the choice between HP and SF for second reduction can be adjusted based on the physician's proficiency in the method and the patient's cooperation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9189,"journal":{"name":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","volume":"25 1","pages":"957"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11590256/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-024-08089-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The hyperpronation (HP) maneuver, known for its high success rate in reducing radial head subluxation after initial treatment failure, has gained significant favor among surgeons over the traditional supination-flexion (SF) maneuver. Despite its perceived advantages, the optimal treatment approach remains a topic of debate in the medical community due to uncertainties surrounding repeat and crossover reduction outcomes. Further research and clinical assessments are needed to establish a definitive treatment protocol ensuring optimal patient outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the efficacy of HP and SF maneuvers following unsuccessful initial treatments for radial head subluxation.

Methods: A thorough search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases up to May 13, 2024 was conducted. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool evaluated study quality, and RevMan 5.3 facilitated systematic review calculations. Subgroup analyses explored reasons for heterogeneity by considering second reduction attempts with crossover and repeat maneuvers. Sensitivity analyses using fixed and random effects models were performed for ambiguous decisions.

Results: Nine studies with 170 patients were analyzed. The success rate for the second reduction was significantly higher with HP (OR = 2.48, 95% CI 1.18 to 5.20, P = 0.02) compared to SF. Repeat maneuver success rate for the second reduction also favored HP (OR = 3.79, 95% CI 1.57 to 9.16, P<0.01). However, no significant difference was found in the success rate of the crossover maneuver for the second reduction (OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.47, P = 0.71).

Conclusion: The initial reduction method was unclear, possibly favoring HP over SF following initial treatment failure for radial head subluxation in children. When the initial reduction technique is clear, the choice between HP and SF for second reduction can be adjusted based on the physician's proficiency in the method and the patient's cooperation.

寻找最佳治疗模式:对儿童桡骨头脱位初次治疗失败后的手法干预进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:与传统的上翻-屈曲(SF)手法相比,超屈曲(HP)手法以其在初次治疗失败后减少桡骨头脱位的高成功率而闻名,在外科医生中获得了极大的青睐。尽管该方法具有公认的优势,但由于重复和交叉复位结果的不确定性,最佳治疗方法仍是医学界争论的话题。我们需要进一步的研究和临床评估,以确定最终的治疗方案,确保患者获得最佳治疗效果。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较桡骨头脱位初次治疗失败后HP和SF手法的疗效:方法:对截至 2024 年 5 月 13 日的 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 数据库进行了全面检索。Cochrane偏倚风险工具对研究质量进行了评估,RevMan 5.3为系统综述计算提供了便利。亚组分析通过考虑交叉和重复操作的二次减瘤尝试,探讨了异质性的原因。对于不明确的决定,使用固定效应和随机效应模型进行了敏感性分析:结果:共分析了九项研究,170 名患者。与 SF 相比,HP 的二次缩窄成功率明显更高(OR = 2.48,95% CI 1.18 至 5.20,P = 0.02)。第二次减张的重复操作成功率也倾向于 HP(OR = 3.79,95% CI 1.57 至 9.16,P = 0.02):儿童桡骨头脱位初次治疗失败后,由于初次复位方法不明确,HP可能优于SF。当初次复位技术明确后,可根据医生对该方法的熟练程度和患者的配合情况,在第二次复位时选择HP还是SF。
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
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1017
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. The scope of the Journal covers research into rheumatic diseases where the primary focus relates specifically to a component(s) of the musculoskeletal system.
×
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