Hernandes Júnior Paulo Roberto, Garcia Thiago Alves, de Oliveira Caravellos Glória Renato, Waldolato Gustavo, de Andrade André Luis Lugnani, Labronici Pedro José, Belangero William Dias
University of Vassouras, Vassouras, Brazil.
State University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2025 Jan 7;35(1):51. doi: 10.1007/s00590-024-04170-8.
This systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression aims to determine whether surgical treatment for proximal humeral fractures is superior to non-surgical treatment regarding pain, functionality, complications, and new surgery rates.
We systematically reviewed clinical trials from PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane up to April 2024. Data comparing surgical or conservative of proximal humeral fractures were retrieved for outcomes of pain, functionality, adverse events, and new surgeries. We conducted meta-analyses and meta-regressions using average age as the independent variable (x-axis) and the main outcomes as the dependent variable (y-axis). For all analyses, a p value lower than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Thirteen articles were included in the final analysis, with most follow-up times occurring at 3, 4, 6, 12, and 24 months. The surgical interventions included ORIF, conventional arthroplasty or reversed. Significant differences favoring of surgery were found for functionality at 6 months (SMD = - 0.238; 95% CI - 0.381 to - 0.096, p = 0.001), and for Constant score at 12 months (RMD = - 4.077; 95% CI - 7.034 to - 1.120, p = 0.007). Subgroup analysis showed significant results favoring arthroplasty at 12 months for the Constant score (RMD = - 4.563; 95% CI - 8.104 to - 1.023, p = 0.012). Meta-analysis for complications indicated that the surgery group had significantly higher odds of complications (OR 4.20; 95% CI 2.054-8.591, p < 0.001). The occurrence of osteonecrosis showed no difference between the surgical and conservative groups (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.167-2.012, p = 0.390). The odds ratio of reoperation were five times higher in the surgical group (OR 5.31; 95% CI 2.467-11.430, p < 0.001). Meta-regressions demonstrated a significant relationship between age and pain, functionality and quality of life at 12-months, with worse results in the conservative group as age increased.
The findings indicate a beneficial effect of surgery for proximal humeral fractures, but only for functionality scores at specific time points. However, the reoperation and complication rates were higher in the surgical group. With increasing age, the outcomes tend to be worse for the conservative group.
1A Systematic review of RCTs.
本系统评价、荟萃分析和荟萃回归旨在确定肱骨近端骨折的手术治疗在疼痛、功能、并发症和再次手术率方面是否优于非手术治疗。
我们系统检索了截至2024年4月PubMed(MEDLINE)、EMBASE、Web of Science、Scopus和Cochrane中的临床试验。检索了比较肱骨近端骨折手术或保守治疗的数据,以获取疼痛、功能、不良事件和再次手术的结果。我们以平均年龄作为自变量(x轴),主要结果作为因变量(y轴)进行荟萃分析和荟萃回归。对于所有分析,p值低于0.05被认为具有统计学意义。
最终分析纳入了13篇文章,大多数随访时间为3、4、6、12和24个月。手术干预包括切开复位内固定、传统关节成形术或反置关节成形术。在6个月时,手术组在功能方面有显著优势(标准化均数差[SMD]=-0.238;95%可信区间[-0.381,-0.096],p=0.001),在12个月时Constant评分方面也有显著优势(相对均数差[RMD]=-4.077;95%可信区间[-7.034,-1.120],p=0.007)。亚组分析显示,在12个月时,关节成形术在Constant评分方面有显著优势(RMD=-4.563;95%可信区间[-8.104,-1.023],p=0.012)。并发症的荟萃分析表明,手术组并发症的发生率显著更高(比值比[OR]4.20;95%可信区间[2.054,8.591],p<0.001)。手术组和保守组在骨坏死的发生率上没有差异(OR 0.57;95%可信区间[0.167,2.012],p=0.390)。手术组再次手术的比值比高出五倍(OR 5.31;95%可信区间[2.467,11.430],p<0.001)。荟萃回归显示,年龄与12个月时的疼痛、功能和生活质量之间存在显著关系,随着年龄增加,保守组的结果更差。
研究结果表明,肱骨近端骨折手术治疗有有益效果,但仅在特定时间点的功能评分方面。然而,手术组的再次手术率和并发症发生率更高。随着年龄增加,保守组的结果往往更差。
1A随机对照试验的系统评价。