Department of Traumatic Orthopedics, Yuncheng Central Hospital, Shanxi Medical University, No. 3690, Hedong East Street, Yanhu District, Yuncheng, 044000, Shanxi Province, China.
J Orthop Surg Res. 2023 Jan 16;18(1):43. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-03528-8.
Supracondylar humeral fractures (SCHFs) are frequent in children, and closed reduction with percutaneous pin fixation remains the standard surgical treatment for displaced SCHFs. Two pinning configurations, medial-lateral crossed entry pinning (MLP) and lateral-only entry pinning (LP), are widely used, but which one is superior to another one is still debatable. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of both pinning fixation methods.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Google Scholar. Relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for radiographical outcomes, functional outcomes and complications.
A total of 19 RCTs comprising 1297 Gartland type II and type III fractures were included. MLP had a decreased risk of loss of reduction (RR = 0.70, 95%CI 0.52-0.94, P = 0.018) but a higher risk of iatrogenic ulnar nerve injury (RR = 2.21, 95%CI 1.11-4.41, P = 0.024) than LP. However, no significant difference was observed for incidence of ulnar nerve injury if applying a mini-open technique in MLP group (RR = 1.73, 0.47-6.31, P = 0.407). There were no differences between both groups in loss of carrying angle (MD = - 0.12, 95%CI - 0.39 to 0.16), loss of Baumann angle (MD = 0.08, 95%CI - 0.15 to 0.30), excellent grading of Flynn criteria (RR = 1.06, 95%CI 0.99-1.14, P = 0.102) and pin tract infection (RR = 0.92, 95%CI 0.50-1.70).
MLP is more effective in maintaining fixation, while LP is safer with respect to ulnar nerve injury. MLP with a mini-open technique reduces the risk of ulnar nerve lesion and is an effective and safe choice.
肱骨髁上骨折(SCHF)在儿童中较为常见,经皮穿针固定的闭合复位仍然是治疗移位 SCHF 的标准手术治疗方法。两种穿针固定方式,即内外侧交叉进针固定(MLP)和仅外侧进针固定(LP),应用广泛,但哪种方法更优仍存在争议。本荟萃分析旨在比较两种穿针固定方法的疗效和安全性。
在 PubMed、EMBASE、Web of Science、Cochrane 图书馆和 Google Scholar 上检索随机对照试验(RCT)。对于影像学结果、功能结果和并发症,计算相对风险(RR)和均数差值(MD)及其相应的 95%置信区间(CI)。
共纳入 19 项 RCT,包含 1297 例 Gartland Ⅱ型和Ⅲ型骨折。MLP 降低了复位丢失的风险(RR=0.70,95%CI 0.52-0.94,P=0.018),但增加了医源性尺神经损伤的风险(RR=2.21,95%CI 1.11-4.41,P=0.024)。然而,如果在 MLP 组中应用微创技术,尺神经损伤的发生率没有差异(RR=1.73,0.47-6.31,P=0.407)。两组在携带角丢失(MD=-0.12,95%CI-0.39 至 0.16)、Baumann 角丢失(MD=0.08,95%CI-0.15 至 0.30)、Flynn 标准优秀分级(RR=1.06,95%CI 0.99-1.14,P=0.102)和针道感染(RR=0.92,95%CI 0.50-1.70)方面无差异。
MLP 在维持固定方面更有效,而 LP 在尺神经损伤方面更安全。采用微创技术的 MLP 可降低尺神经损伤的风险,是一种有效且安全的选择。