Cao Renwei, Zhang Jianyu, Sun Weitong, Jiang Xieyuan, Hua Kehan, Xiao Dan, Chen Chen, Zha Yejun, Gong Maoqi
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Peking University Fourth School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing, China.
Orthop Surg. 2025 Jan;17(1):36-44. doi: 10.1111/os.14307. Epub 2024 Dec 11.
Plate fixation is the preferred method for treating forearm shaft fractures. However, it remains controversial regarding the necessity of implant removal after bone union. This review aims to assess refracture risk after plate removal.
We searched various data sources, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. A total of 6749 papers were identified, of which 23 studies were eligible for final quantitative syntheses. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were conducted to reduce heterogeneity and make the results more reliable.
The total risk difference (RD) was 0.06 (0.04-0.09), indicating that the difference was significant. In the "Reasons for Removal" subgroup analysis, the RD of the "No Symptom" subgroup was 0.07 (95% CI = 0.04-0.11), while the RD of the "Symptoms" subgroup was 0.04 (95% CI = -0.02 to 0.10). In the "Plate Type" subgroup analysis, the RD of the "LCP" subgroup was 0.07 (95% CI = 0.02-0.13), while the RD of the "DCP" subgroup was 0.07 (95% CI = 0.01-0.13). After omitting each study one by one, the RDs were all significant.
Plate retention is significantly associated with a lower rate of refracture than plate removal. Consequently, it is not recommended to remove implants, especially for patients without implant-related symptoms, but more reliable evidence is still needed.
The review was registered on PROSPERO and the registration ID is CRD42023424743, and a protocol was not prepared.
钢板固定是治疗尺桡骨干骨折的首选方法。然而,骨折愈合后是否有必要取出内植物仍存在争议。本综述旨在评估取出钢板后的再骨折风险。
我们检索了多个数据来源,包括PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆。共识别出6749篇论文,其中23项研究符合最终定量综合分析的条件。进行亚组分析和敏感性分析以减少异质性并使结果更可靠。
总风险差(RD)为0.06(0.04 - 0.09),表明差异具有统计学意义。在“取出原因”亚组分析中,“无症状”亚组的RD为0.07(95%CI = 0.04 - 0.11),而“有症状”亚组的RD为0.04(95%CI = -0.02至0.10)。在“钢板类型”亚组分析中,“锁定加压钢板(LCP)”亚组的RD为0.07(95%CI = 0.02 - 0.13),而“动力加压钢板(DCP)”亚组的RD为0.07(95%CI = 0.01 - 0.13)。逐一剔除每项研究后,RD均具有统计学意义。
保留钢板与再骨折率低于取出钢板显著相关。因此,不建议取出内植物,尤其是对于没有与内植物相关症状的患者,但仍需要更可靠的证据。
本综述已在PROSPERO上注册,注册编号为CRD42023424743,未制定方案。