Suppr超能文献

锁定钢板与逆行髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折的系统评价与Meta分析

Locked Plating Versus Retrograde Intramedullary Nailing for Distal Femur Fractures: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Neradi Deepak, Sodavarapu Praveen, Jindal Karan, Kumar Deepak, Kumar Vishal, Goni Vijay

机构信息

Senior Resident, Department of Orthopaedics, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector 12, Chandigarh 160012, India.

Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedics, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Sector 12, Chandigarh 160012, India.

出版信息

Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2022 Feb;10(2):141-152. doi: 10.22038/abjs.2021.53515.2656.

Abstract

Modern advances in techniques and implants have allowed for a better operative fixation for distal femoral fractures. Both locked plating and retromedullary nail have allowed surgeons to stabilize these fractures with minimal soft tissue dissection and preserve blood supply. Although both the implants have been used extensively for such types of fractures, the superiority of one implant over the other is still doubtful. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to compare locked plating and retrograde intramedullary nailing in distal femoral fractures. Based on prisma guidelines, electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Ovid Medline were searched using a well-defined search strategy. Outcome measures which were studied included blood loss, implant failure, infection, knee range of motion, malunion, non-union, pain, surgical duration and union time Surgical duration (95% CI 2.90 to 17.13, p <0.01) and blood loss (95% CI 69.60 to123.18, p <0.01) favoured plating group and the difference is significant. But while analysing parameters like implant failure, knee range of motion, non-union and union time, our analysis favoured nailing group, but the difference is not significant. Overall, both locked plating and retrograde intramedullary nailing are comparable with respect to union and complications in distal femur fractures, but we need further larger and high quality randomized studies to evaluate the difference.

摘要

技术和植入物的现代进展使股骨远端骨折能够获得更好的手术固定。锁定钢板和逆行髓内钉都使外科医生能够在最小程度的软组织剥离下稳定这些骨折,并保留血供。尽管这两种植入物都已广泛用于此类骨折,但一种植入物相对于另一种的优越性仍值得怀疑。因此,我们进行了这项荟萃分析,以比较锁定钢板和逆行髓内钉治疗股骨远端骨折的效果。根据PRISMA指南,使用明确的检索策略对包括PubMed、Embase、Scopus和Ovid Medline在内的电子数据库进行了检索。研究的结局指标包括失血量、植入物失败、感染、膝关节活动范围、畸形愈合、不愈合、疼痛、手术时间和愈合时间。手术时间(95%CI 2.90至17.13,p<0.01)和失血量(95%CI 69.60至123.18,p<0.01)有利于钢板组,差异具有统计学意义。但在分析植入物失败、膝关节活动范围、不愈合和愈合时间等参数时,我们的分析有利于髓内钉组,但差异不显著。总体而言,锁定钢板和逆行髓内钉在股骨远端骨折的愈合和并发症方面具有可比性,但我们需要进一步开展更大规模、高质量的随机研究来评估差异。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

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