Zhao Huan-Li, Wang Gui-Bin, Jia Yue-Qing, Zhu Shi-Cai, Zhang Feng-Fang, Liu Hong-Mei
Department of Orthopedics, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi, Shandong, China (mainland).
Department of Radiology, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi, Shandong, China (mainland).
Med Sci Monit. 2015 Sep 22;21:2837-44. doi: 10.12659/MSM.894075.
BACKGROUND To compare risk of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) in distal radius fracture (DRF) patients after 7 treatments using bridging external fixation (BrEF), non-bridging external fixation (non-BrEF), plaster fixation, K-wire fixation, dorsal plating fixation, volar plating fixation, and dorsal and volar plating by performing a network meta-analysis. MATERIAL AND METHODS An exhaustive search of electronic databases identified randomized controlled trails (RCTs) closely related to our study topic. The published articles were screened, based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, to select high-quality studies for the present network meta-analysis. Data extracted from the selected studies were analyzed using STATA version 12.0 software. RESULTS The literature search and selection process identified 12 eligible RCTs that contained a total of 1370 DRF patients (394 patients with BrEF, 377 patients with non-BrEF, 89 patients with K-wire fixation, 192 patients with plaster fixation, 42 patients with dorsal plating fixation, 152 patients with volar plating fixation, and 124 patients with dorsal and volar plating fixation). Our network meta-analysis results demonstrated no significant differences in CTS risk among the 7 treatments (P>0.05). The value of surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), however, suggested that dorsal plating fixation is the optimal treatment, with the lowest risk of CTS in DRF patients (dorsal plating fixation: 89.2%; dorsal and volar plating: 57.8%; plaster fixation: 50.9%; non-BrEF: 50.6%; volar plating fixation: 39.6%; BrEF: 38.4%; K-wire fixation: 23.6%). CONCLUSIONS Our network meta-analysis provides evidence that dorsal plating fixation significantly decreases the risk of CTS and could be the method of choice in DRF patients.
背景 通过进行网状Meta分析,比较使用桥接外固定(BrEF)、非桥接外固定(non-BrEF)、石膏固定、克氏针固定、背侧钢板固定、掌侧钢板固定以及背侧和掌侧钢板固定这7种治疗方法后桡骨远端骨折(DRF)患者发生腕管综合征(CTS)的风险。
材料与方法 对电子数据库进行全面检索,以确定与我们研究主题密切相关的随机对照试验(RCT)。根据预先设定的纳入和排除标准对已发表的文章进行筛选,以选择高质量的研究用于当前的网状Meta分析。使用STATA 12.0软件对从选定研究中提取的数据进行分析。
结果 文献检索和筛选过程确定了12项符合条件的RCT,共纳入1370例DRF患者(394例采用BrEF治疗,377例采用non-BrEF治疗,89例采用克氏针固定,192例采用石膏固定,42例采用背侧钢板固定,152例采用掌侧钢板固定,124例采用背侧和掌侧钢板固定)。我们的网状Meta分析结果表明,这7种治疗方法在CTS风险方面无显著差异(P>0.05)。然而,累积排序曲线下面积(SUCRA)值表明,背侧钢板固定是最佳治疗方法,DRF患者发生CTS的风险最低(背侧钢板固定:89.2%;背侧和掌侧钢板固定:57.8%;石膏固定:50.9%;non-BrEF:50.6%;掌侧钢板固定:39.6%;BrEF:38.4%;克氏针固定:2,3.6%)。
结论 我们的网状Meta分析提供了证据表明背侧钢板固定可显著降低CTS风险,可能是DRF患者的首选治疗方法。