Cable pin system versus K-wire tension band fixation for patella fractures in Chinese Han population: A meta-analysis.

Q Engineering
Kun Zha, Guo-Hui Liu, Shu-Hua Yang, Wu Zhou, Yi Liu, Qi-Peng Wu
{"title":"Cable pin system versus K-wire tension band fixation for patella fractures in Chinese Han population: A meta-analysis.","authors":"Kun Zha,&nbsp;Guo-Hui Liu,&nbsp;Shu-Hua Yang,&nbsp;Wu Zhou,&nbsp;Yi Liu,&nbsp;Qi-Peng Wu","doi":"10.1007/s11596-017-1787-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This meta-analysis compared the therapeutic effect of cable pin system (CPS) with K-wire tension band (KTB) in the treatment of patella fractures among Chinese Han population. The databases of PubMed, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese WanFang and Chinese VIP were searched for studies on CPS versus KTB in the treatment of patella fractures among Chinese Han population. Literatures were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of the studies was assessed, and meta-analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's REVMAN 5.3 software. A total of 932 patients from 15 studies were included in this meta-analysis (426 fractures treated with CPS and 506 fractures treated with KTB). There were significant differences in duration of hospital stay [mean difference (MD)=-1.07; 95% confidence interval (CI):-1.71 to-0.43], fracture healing time (MD=-1.23; 95% CI:-1.68 to-0.77), flexion degree of knee joint at 6th month after operation (MD=14.82; 95% CI: 10.93 to 18.71), incidence of postoperative complication [risk ratio (RR)=0.16; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.27] and excellent-good rate of Böstman score (RR=1.09; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.16) between the CPS group and KTB group, while no significant difference was found in operative time between the two groups (MD=-4.52; 95% CI:-11.70 to 2.67). For the treatment of patella fractures among Chinese Han population, limited evidence suggests that the CPS is more suitable than the KTB when considering the hospital stay, fracture healing time, flexion degree of knee at 6th month after operation, incidence of postoperative complication and excellent-good rate of Böstman joint score. Due to the limitation of high quality evidence and sample size, more large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the findings in the future.</p>","PeriodicalId":15925,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology [Medical Sciences]","volume":"37 5","pages":"667-674"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11596-017-1787-8","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology [Medical Sciences]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11596-017-1787-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/10/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This meta-analysis compared the therapeutic effect of cable pin system (CPS) with K-wire tension band (KTB) in the treatment of patella fractures among Chinese Han population. The databases of PubMed, Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese WanFang and Chinese VIP were searched for studies on CPS versus KTB in the treatment of patella fractures among Chinese Han population. Literatures were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of the studies was assessed, and meta-analysis was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's REVMAN 5.3 software. A total of 932 patients from 15 studies were included in this meta-analysis (426 fractures treated with CPS and 506 fractures treated with KTB). There were significant differences in duration of hospital stay [mean difference (MD)=-1.07; 95% confidence interval (CI):-1.71 to-0.43], fracture healing time (MD=-1.23; 95% CI:-1.68 to-0.77), flexion degree of knee joint at 6th month after operation (MD=14.82; 95% CI: 10.93 to 18.71), incidence of postoperative complication [risk ratio (RR)=0.16; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.27] and excellent-good rate of Böstman score (RR=1.09; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.16) between the CPS group and KTB group, while no significant difference was found in operative time between the two groups (MD=-4.52; 95% CI:-11.70 to 2.67). For the treatment of patella fractures among Chinese Han population, limited evidence suggests that the CPS is more suitable than the KTB when considering the hospital stay, fracture healing time, flexion degree of knee at 6th month after operation, incidence of postoperative complication and excellent-good rate of Böstman joint score. Due to the limitation of high quality evidence and sample size, more large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the findings in the future.

中国汉族髌骨骨折的电缆钉系统与k线张力带固定:一项荟萃分析。
本荟萃分析比较了电缆针系统(CPS)与k线张力带(KTB)治疗中国汉族髌骨骨折的疗效。检索PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网(CNKI)、中国万方、中国VIP等数据库,检索CPS与KTB治疗中国汉族髌骨骨折的相关研究。根据纳入和排除标准对文献进行筛选。对研究质量进行评估,并使用Cochrane Collaboration的REVMAN 5.3软件进行meta分析。这项荟萃分析共纳入了来自15项研究的932例患者(426例骨折采用CPS治疗,506例骨折采用KTB治疗)。两组住院时间差异有统计学意义[mean difference (MD)=-1.07;95%可信区间(CI):-1.71 ~ 0.43],骨折愈合时间(MD=-1.23;95% CI:-1.68 ~ 0.77),术后6个月膝关节屈曲度(MD=14.82;95% CI: 10.93 ~ 18.71),术后并发症发生率[风险比(RR)=0.16;95% CI: 0.09 ~ 0.27],优良率Böstman评分(RR=1.09;95% CI: 1.03 ~ 1.16),两组手术时间差异无统计学意义(MD=-4.52;95% CI:-11.70至2.67)。对于中国汉族人群髌骨骨折的治疗,从住院时间、骨折愈合时间、术后6个月膝关节屈曲程度、术后并发症发生率和Böstman关节评分优良率等方面考虑,有限证据表明CPS比KTB更合适。由于高质量证据和样本量的限制,未来需要更多的大规模随机对照试验来验证研究结果。
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
1.08
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
×
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