Su Yu-Cheng, Wang Ying-Yu, Fang Ching-Ju, Tu Yu-Kang, Chang Chih-Wei, Kuan Fa-Chuan, Hsu Kai-Lan, Shih Chien-An
Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Department of Secretariat, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, College of Medicine, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
Bone Jt Open. 2024 Mar 18;5(3):227-235. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.53.BJO-2023-0133.R1.
The optimal management of posterior malleolar ankle fractures, a prevalent type of ankle trauma, is essential for improved prognosis. However, there remains a debate over the most effective surgical approach, particularly between screw and plate fixation methods. This study aims to investigate the differences in outcomes associated with these fixation techniques.
We conducted a comprehensive review of clinical trials comparing anteroposterior (A-P) screws, posteroanterior (P-A) screws, and plate fixation. Two investigators validated the data sourced from multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science). Following PRISMA guidelines, we carried out a network meta-analysis (NMA) using visual analogue scale and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included range of motion limitations, radiological outcomes, and complication rates.
The NMA encompassed 13 studies, consisting of four randomized trials and eight retrospective ones. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve-based ranking, the A-P screw was ranked highest for improvements in AOFAS and exhibited lowest in infection and peroneal nerve injury incidence. The P-A screws, on the other hand, excelled in terms of VAS score improvements. Conversely, posterior buttress plate fixation showed the least incidence of osteoarthritis grade progression, postoperative articular step-off ≥ 2 mm, nonunions, and loss of ankle dorsiflexion ≥ 5°, though it underperformed in most other clinical outcomes.
The NMA suggests that open plating is more likely to provide better radiological outcomes, while screw fixation may have a greater potential for superior functional and pain results. Nevertheless, clinicians should still consider the fragment size and fracture pattern, weighing the advantages of rigid biomechanical fixation against the possibility of soft-tissue damage, to optimize treatment results.
后踝骨折是一种常见的踝关节创伤类型,其最佳治疗方法对于改善预后至关重要。然而,对于最有效的手术方法仍存在争议,特别是在螺钉固定和钢板固定方法之间。本研究旨在探讨这些固定技术在疗效上的差异。
我们对比较前后位(A-P)螺钉、后前位(P-A)螺钉和钢板固定的临床试验进行了全面综述。两名研究人员对来自多个数据库(MEDLINE、EMBASE和科学网)的数据进行了验证。按照PRISMA指南,我们以视觉模拟量表和美国矫形足踝协会评分(AOFAS)作为主要结局指标进行了网状Meta分析(NMA)。次要结局指标包括活动范围受限、影像学结局和并发症发生率。
NMA纳入了13项研究,包括4项随机试验和8项回顾性研究。根据基于累积排名曲线下面积的排名,A-P螺钉在AOFAS改善方面排名最高,在感染和腓总神经损伤发生率方面最低。另一方面,P-A螺钉在VAS评分改善方面表现出色。相反,后支撑钢板固定在骨关节炎分级进展、术后关节台阶≥2mm、骨不连和踝关节背屈丧失≥5°的发生率方面最低,尽管在大多数其他临床结局方面表现不佳。
NMA表明,切开复位钢板内固定更有可能提供更好的影像学结局,而螺钉固定在功能和疼痛改善方面可能具有更大的潜力。然而,临床医生仍应考虑骨折块大小和骨折类型,权衡坚固生物力学固定的优势与软组织损伤的可能性,以优化治疗效果。