Open Reduction with Internal Fixation (ORIF) versus Hybrid Circular External Fixator (HCEF) as the Treatment of Choice for Bicondylar Tibial Plateau Fractures : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
{"title":"Open Reduction with Internal Fixation (ORIF) versus Hybrid Circular External Fixator (HCEF) as the Treatment of Choice for Bicondylar Tibial Plateau Fractures : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"I. Susila, S. Savio, C. Dharmayuda","doi":"10.1177/2325967120s00042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Bicondylar Tibial Plateu Fractures (BTPF) present a challenge in management due to the involvement of articular surface, resulting in high complication rate. This study aims to compare two treatments, Open Reduction with Internal Fixation (ORIF) and Hybrid Circular External Fixation (HCEF) as the choice of surgical procedure for BTPF that still controversial until now. Discussion: BTPF is a complex and challenging injury associated with severe bone and soft tissue damage which may result in severe morbidity and chronic complications. The minimally invasive procedure offered by HCEF preserves soft tissue and offers lower rate of deep infection. Furthermore, HCEF should be more considered as the treatment of choice for BTPF due to its shorter hospital LoS which may minimalize nosocomial infection risks and costs. Materials and Methods: A systematic review using Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar was conducted based on PRISMA guideline. Inclusion criteria were studies comparing HCEF and ORIF of BTPF. Studies of only one surgical technique modality, Schatzker types I-IV Tibial Plateu Fractures, and case reports were excluded, resulting in six included studies. For the meta-analysis of hospital length of stay (LoS), random effect model was used for continuous outcomes using Review Manager 5.3. Results: Most common complications are nerve injuries, infection, and non/delayed union. Blood loss was higher in ORIF group, while both procedures have similar operation time and functional outcome. The mean hospital LoS for ORIF (n = 60) was 18.45, as for HCEF (n =63) was 8.325. There was significant difference in terms of hospital LoS between ORIF and HCEF (P =0.003). Conclusion: ORIF and HCEF carry similar operation time, functional outcome, union rate, and complication, though HCEF is more beneficial in terms of blood loss and hospital LoS.","PeriodicalId":19646,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/2325967120s00042","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967120s00042","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Bicondylar Tibial Plateu Fractures (BTPF) present a challenge in management due to the involvement of articular surface, resulting in high complication rate. This study aims to compare two treatments, Open Reduction with Internal Fixation (ORIF) and Hybrid Circular External Fixation (HCEF) as the choice of surgical procedure for BTPF that still controversial until now. Discussion: BTPF is a complex and challenging injury associated with severe bone and soft tissue damage which may result in severe morbidity and chronic complications. The minimally invasive procedure offered by HCEF preserves soft tissue and offers lower rate of deep infection. Furthermore, HCEF should be more considered as the treatment of choice for BTPF due to its shorter hospital LoS which may minimalize nosocomial infection risks and costs. Materials and Methods: A systematic review using Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar was conducted based on PRISMA guideline. Inclusion criteria were studies comparing HCEF and ORIF of BTPF. Studies of only one surgical technique modality, Schatzker types I-IV Tibial Plateu Fractures, and case reports were excluded, resulting in six included studies. For the meta-analysis of hospital length of stay (LoS), random effect model was used for continuous outcomes using Review Manager 5.3. Results: Most common complications are nerve injuries, infection, and non/delayed union. Blood loss was higher in ORIF group, while both procedures have similar operation time and functional outcome. The mean hospital LoS for ORIF (n = 60) was 18.45, as for HCEF (n =63) was 8.325. There was significant difference in terms of hospital LoS between ORIF and HCEF (P =0.003). Conclusion: ORIF and HCEF carry similar operation time, functional outcome, union rate, and complication, though HCEF is more beneficial in terms of blood loss and hospital LoS.
期刊介绍:
The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM), developed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), is a global, peer-reviewed, open access journal that combines the interests of researchers and clinical practitioners across orthopaedic sports medicine, arthroscopy, and knee arthroplasty.
Topics include original research in the areas of:
-Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, including surgical and nonsurgical treatment of orthopaedic sports injuries
-Arthroscopic Surgery (Shoulder/Elbow/Wrist/Hip/Knee/Ankle/Foot)
-Relevant translational research
-Sports traumatology/epidemiology
-Knee and shoulder arthroplasty
The OJSM also publishes relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).