Suppr超能文献

股骨干骨折顺行与逆行髓内钉固定术:一项系统评价与Meta分析

Antegrade vs Retrograde Intra-Medullary Nailing in Femoral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Daher Mohammad, Tarchichi Jean, Zalaquett Ziad, Casey Jack C, Ghanimeh Joe, Mansour Jad

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.

Hotel Dieu de France, Orthopedics department, Beirut, Lebanon.

出版信息

Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2024;12(8):535-545. doi: 10.22038/ABJS.2024.78871.3623.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Femoral shaft fractures are one of the most prevalent fractures found in clinical practice. Numerous operative and non-operative options are readily available for the treatment of such fractures with intra-medullary nailing being the gold standard. To date, no consensus has been reached favoring one approach over the other. Thus, this meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes between an antegrade and retrograde intra-medullary nailing for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar (page 1-20), and Embase were searched till January 2024. The clinical outcomes evaluated were the incidence of adverse events, reoperations, hip and knee pain, and surgery-related parameters.

RESULTS

Higher rates of hip pain, and heterotopic ossification (p=0.0003, and p=0.0002 respectively) was observed with antegrade nailing. However, a higher rate of knee pain (p=0.02) was appreciated in retrograde nailing. There was no statistically significant difference in the remaining analyzed outcomes such as operative time, reoperation rate or other complications.

CONCLUSION

Despite a higher rate of heterotopic ossification using the antegrade nailing technique, both the antegrade and retrograde nailing techniques yield overall similar outcomes. Therefore, the decision to choose one or the other should be based on patient-related factors, and the surgeon's experience and preference.

摘要

目的

股骨干骨折是临床实践中最常见的骨折之一。治疗此类骨折有多种手术和非手术选择,髓内钉固定是金标准。迄今为止,对于哪种方法更优尚未达成共识。因此,本荟萃分析旨在比较顺行和逆行髓内钉固定治疗股骨干骨折的疗效。

方法

检索了截至2024年1月的PubMed、Cochrane、谷歌学术(第1 - 20页)和Embase。评估的临床结局包括不良事件发生率、再次手术、髋部和膝部疼痛以及手术相关参数。

结果

顺行髓内钉固定观察到髋部疼痛和异位骨化发生率较高(分别为p = 0.0003和p = 0.0002)。然而,逆行髓内钉固定膝部疼痛发生率较高(p = 0.02)。其余分析结局如手术时间、再次手术率或其他并发症无统计学显著差异。

结论

尽管顺行髓内钉固定技术导致异位骨化发生率较高,但顺行和逆行髓内钉固定技术总体疗效相似。因此,选择哪种方法应基于患者相关因素以及外科医生的经验和偏好。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4677/11353144/e514169e6be8/ABJS-12-535-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验