Plate vs. nail for extra-articular distal tibia fractures: How should we personalize surgical treatment? A meta-analysis of 1332 patients.
Distal tibia fractures
Infection
Intramedullary nailing
Mal-union
Personalized approach
Plate fixation
Shared decision-making
TEMPMC2TEMPMCBeta-analysis
Journal
Injury
ISSN: 1879-0267
Titre abrégé: Injury
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 0226040
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
10
06
2020
revised:
06
09
2020
accepted:
05
10
2020
pubmed:
4
12
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
entrez:
3
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Treatment for distal diaphyseal or metaphyseal tibia fractures is challenging and the optimal surgical strategy remains a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was to compare plate fixation with nailing in terms of operation time, non-union, time-to-union, mal-union, infection, subsequent re-interventions and functional outcomes (quality of life scores, knee- and ankle scores). A search was performed in PubMed/Embase/CINAHL/CENTRAL for all study designs comparing plate fixation with intramedullary nailing (IMN). Data were pooled using RevMan and presented as odds ratios (OR), risk difference (RD), weighted mean difference (WMD) or weighted standardized mean difference (WSMD) with a 95% confidence interval (95%CI). All analyzes were stratified for study design. A total of 15 studies with 1332 patients were analyzed, including ten RCTs (n = 873) and five observational studies (n = 459). IMN leads to a shorter time-to-union (WMD: 0.4 months, 95%CI 0.1 - 0.7), shorter time-to-full-weightbearing (WMD: 0.6 months, 95%CI 0.4 - 0.8) and shorter operation duration (WMD: 15.5 min, 95%CI 9.3 - 21.7). Plating leads to a lower risk for mal-union (RD: -10%, OR: 0.4, 95%CI 0.3 - 0.6), but higher risk for infection (RD: 8%, OR: 2.4, 95%CI 1.5 - 3.8). No differences were detected with regard to non-union (RD: 1%, OR: 0.7, 95%CI 0.3 - 1.7), subsequent re-interventions (RD: 4%, OR: 1.3, 95%CI 0.8 - 1.9) and functional outcomes (WSMD: -0.4, 95%CI -0.9 - 0.1). The effect estimates of RCTs and observational studies were equal for all outcomes except for time to union and mal-union. Satisfactory results can be obtained with both plate fixation and nailing for distal extra-articular tibia fractures. However, nailing is associated with higher rates of mal-union and anterior knee pain while plate fixation results in an increased risk of infection. This study provides a guideline towards a personalized approach and facilitates shared decision-making in surgical treatment of distal extra-articular tibia fractures. The definitive treatment should be case-based and aligned to patient-specific needs in order to minimize the risk of complications.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Treatment for distal diaphyseal or metaphyseal tibia fractures is challenging and the optimal surgical strategy remains a matter of debate. The purpose of this study was to compare plate fixation with nailing in terms of operation time, non-union, time-to-union, mal-union, infection, subsequent re-interventions and functional outcomes (quality of life scores, knee- and ankle scores).
METHODS
METHODS
A search was performed in PubMed/Embase/CINAHL/CENTRAL for all study designs comparing plate fixation with intramedullary nailing (IMN). Data were pooled using RevMan and presented as odds ratios (OR), risk difference (RD), weighted mean difference (WMD) or weighted standardized mean difference (WSMD) with a 95% confidence interval (95%CI). All analyzes were stratified for study design.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 15 studies with 1332 patients were analyzed, including ten RCTs (n = 873) and five observational studies (n = 459). IMN leads to a shorter time-to-union (WMD: 0.4 months, 95%CI 0.1 - 0.7), shorter time-to-full-weightbearing (WMD: 0.6 months, 95%CI 0.4 - 0.8) and shorter operation duration (WMD: 15.5 min, 95%CI 9.3 - 21.7). Plating leads to a lower risk for mal-union (RD: -10%, OR: 0.4, 95%CI 0.3 - 0.6), but higher risk for infection (RD: 8%, OR: 2.4, 95%CI 1.5 - 3.8). No differences were detected with regard to non-union (RD: 1%, OR: 0.7, 95%CI 0.3 - 1.7), subsequent re-interventions (RD: 4%, OR: 1.3, 95%CI 0.8 - 1.9) and functional outcomes (WSMD: -0.4, 95%CI -0.9 - 0.1). The effect estimates of RCTs and observational studies were equal for all outcomes except for time to union and mal-union.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Satisfactory results can be obtained with both plate fixation and nailing for distal extra-articular tibia fractures. However, nailing is associated with higher rates of mal-union and anterior knee pain while plate fixation results in an increased risk of infection. This study provides a guideline towards a personalized approach and facilitates shared decision-making in surgical treatment of distal extra-articular tibia fractures. The definitive treatment should be case-based and aligned to patient-specific needs in order to minimize the risk of complications.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33268081
pii: S0020-1383(20)30826-3
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2020.10.026
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
345-357Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest Each author certifies that he has no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) or financial remunerations that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.