Suppr超能文献

切开复位内固定与环形外固定架治疗胫骨平台骨折的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Comparison between open reduction with internal fixation to circular external fixation for tibial plateau fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, Shenzhen Pingle Orthopaedic Hospital (Shenzhen Pingshan Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital), Shenzhen, Guangdong, P.R. China.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2020 Sep 17;15(9):e0232911. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0232911. eCollection 2020.

Abstract

Peer-reviewed published studies on tibial plateau fractures treated with either open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) or circular external fixation were reviewed to compare functional, radiological outcomes, postoperative complications, and reoperation rates between the two methods. A systematic search of various databases including Medline, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar from inception until June 2019 was performed. 17 studies with 1168 participants were included in the review. Most of the studies (76%) were retrospective in nature and had low or unclear bias risks. Incidence of total infection (Odds ratio [OR], 2.58; 95% CI, 1.33-5.02) and malunions (OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.12-5.84) were higher and length of hospital stay was shorter in patients treated with circular external fixator (Mean difference [MD], -6.1; 95% CI, -11.1--1.19). There were no differences in the incidence of secondary osteoarthritis (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 0.92-2.42), range of motion (MD, 2.28; 95% CI, -11.27-15.82) non-union (OR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.14-14.27) and reoperation rates (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 0.90-3.78) between the two groups. Results from this investigation suggest that circular fixation may offer some advantages over ORIF such as a shortened length of hospital stay and early return to preinjury activities. Definitive clinical recommendations cannot be made as it also presents higher rates of postoperative complications than ORIF.

摘要

回顾了经皮加压钢板内固定术(ORIF)或环形外固定术治疗胫骨平台骨折的经同行评审的已发表研究,以比较两种方法的功能、影像学结果、术后并发症和再次手术率。对 Medline、Cochrane 对照试验注册中心(CENTRAL)、ScienceDirect 和 Google Scholar 等各种数据库进行了系统搜索,检索时间从建库开始至 2019 年 6 月。纳入了 17 项研究,共 1168 名参与者。大多数研究(76%)为回顾性研究,且存在低风险或不明确的偏倚风险。环形外固定器治疗患者的总感染发生率(优势比[OR],2.58;95%置信区间[CI],1.33-5.02)和畸形愈合发生率(OR,2.56;95% CI,1.12-5.84)更高,住院时间更短(平均差值[MD],-6.1;95% CI,-11.1--1.19)。两组患者的继发性骨关节炎发生率(OR,1.49;95% CI,0.92-2.42)、活动范围(MD,2.28;95% CI,-11.27-15.82)、骨不连发生率(OR,1.44;95% CI,0.14-14.27)和再次手术率(OR,1.84;95% CI,0.90-3.78)无差异。本研究结果表明,环形固定可能比 ORIF 具有一些优势,例如缩短住院时间和更早恢复到受伤前的活动。但由于术后并发症发生率高于 ORIF,因此无法给出明确的临床推荐。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2ac6/7498044/c4232f456d5a/pone.0232911.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验