超声引导下操作不能防止桡骨远端骨折(Colles)中基于标志性骨折复位的错位。

IF 1.2 Q3 EMERGENCY MEDICINE Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock Pub Date : 2023-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-25 DOI:10.4103/jets.jets_157_22
Sandeep Kumar Nema, Jose Austine, Premkumar Ramasubramani, Ruchin Agrawal
{"title":"超声引导下操作不能防止桡骨远端骨折(Colles)中基于标志性骨折复位的错位。","authors":"Sandeep Kumar Nema,&nbsp;Jose Austine,&nbsp;Premkumar Ramasubramani,&nbsp;Ruchin Agrawal","doi":"10.4103/jets.jets_157_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This systematic review aims to determine the relative risk of distal radius (Colles) fracture (DRF) malalignment between ultrasound (USG)-guided and conventional/landmark guided/blind manipulation and reduction (M&R).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched 3932 records from major electronic bibliographic databases on USG-guided manipulation of DRF. Studies with randomized, quasi-randomized, and cross-sectional study designs meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this review. USG and landmark-guided DRF manipulations were named cases and controls, respectively. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen and nine studies were analysed for qualitative and quantitative analysis in this review. Nine hundred fifty-one DRF patients (475 cases and 476 controls) from 9 studies with mean ages of 51.52 ± 11.86 (22-92) and 55.82 ± 11.28 (18-98) years for cases and controls were pooled for this review. The pooled relative risk estimate from the studies included in the meta-analysis was 0.90 (0.74-1.09). There was a 10% decrease in the risk of malalignment with USG than the landmark guided M&R of DRF. The <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic estimated a heterogeneity of 83%. Sensitivity analysis revealed a relative risk of 1.00 (0.96-1.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The USG-guided manipulation does not prevent malalignment over the landmark-based manipulation of DRF. The risk of bias across the included studies and heterogeneity of 83% mandates further unbiased, high-quality studies to verify the findings of this review.</p>","PeriodicalId":15692,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10424739/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasound-Guided Manipulation does not Prevent Malalignment Over Landmark-Based Fracture Reduction in Distal Radius Fracture (Colles).\",\"authors\":\"Sandeep Kumar Nema,&nbsp;Jose Austine,&nbsp;Premkumar Ramasubramani,&nbsp;Ruchin Agrawal\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jets.jets_157_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This systematic review aims to determine the relative risk of distal radius (Colles) fracture (DRF) malalignment between ultrasound (USG)-guided and conventional/landmark guided/blind manipulation and reduction (M&R).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched 3932 records from major electronic bibliographic databases on USG-guided manipulation of DRF. Studies with randomized, quasi-randomized, and cross-sectional study designs meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this review. USG and landmark-guided DRF manipulations were named cases and controls, respectively. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen and nine studies were analysed for qualitative and quantitative analysis in this review. Nine hundred fifty-one DRF patients (475 cases and 476 controls) from 9 studies with mean ages of 51.52 ± 11.86 (22-92) and 55.82 ± 11.28 (18-98) years for cases and controls were pooled for this review. The pooled relative risk estimate from the studies included in the meta-analysis was 0.90 (0.74-1.09). There was a 10% decrease in the risk of malalignment with USG than the landmark guided M&R of DRF. The <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic estimated a heterogeneity of 83%. Sensitivity analysis revealed a relative risk of 1.00 (0.96-1.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The USG-guided manipulation does not prevent malalignment over the landmark-based manipulation of DRF. The risk of bias across the included studies and heterogeneity of 83% mandates further unbiased, high-quality studies to verify the findings of this review.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10424739/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jets.jets_157_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EMERGENCY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jets.jets_157_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

引言:本系统综述旨在确定超声(USG)引导和传统/标志引导/盲操作复位(M&R)之间桡骨远端(Colles)骨折(DRF)不对齐的相对风险。方法:我们从主要电子文献数据库中检索了3932份USG引导的DRF操作记录。符合纳入标准的随机、准随机和横断面研究设计纳入本综述。USG和界标引导DRF操作分别命名为病例和对照组。纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表用于评估纳入研究的质量。结果:本综述对13项和9项研究进行了定性和定量分析。来自9项研究的951名DRF患者(475例病例和476名对照组),病例和对照组的平均年龄分别为51.52±11.86(22-92)和55.82±11.28(18-98)岁。荟萃分析中纳入的研究的合并相对风险估计值为0.90(0.74-1.09)。与里程碑式指导的DRF M&R相比,与USG不一致的风险降低了10%。I2统计估计异质性为83%。敏感性分析显示相对风险为1.00(0.96-1.05)。纳入研究的偏倚风险和83%的异质性要求进一步进行无偏倚、高质量的研究,以验证本综述的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ultrasound-Guided Manipulation does not Prevent Malalignment Over Landmark-Based Fracture Reduction in Distal Radius Fracture (Colles).

Introduction: This systematic review aims to determine the relative risk of distal radius (Colles) fracture (DRF) malalignment between ultrasound (USG)-guided and conventional/landmark guided/blind manipulation and reduction (M&R).

Methods: We searched 3932 records from major electronic bibliographic databases on USG-guided manipulation of DRF. Studies with randomized, quasi-randomized, and cross-sectional study designs meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this review. USG and landmark-guided DRF manipulations were named cases and controls, respectively. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of included studies.

Results: Thirteen and nine studies were analysed for qualitative and quantitative analysis in this review. Nine hundred fifty-one DRF patients (475 cases and 476 controls) from 9 studies with mean ages of 51.52 ± 11.86 (22-92) and 55.82 ± 11.28 (18-98) years for cases and controls were pooled for this review. The pooled relative risk estimate from the studies included in the meta-analysis was 0.90 (0.74-1.09). There was a 10% decrease in the risk of malalignment with USG than the landmark guided M&R of DRF. The I2 statistic estimated a heterogeneity of 83%. Sensitivity analysis revealed a relative risk of 1.00 (0.96-1.05).

Conclusion: The USG-guided manipulation does not prevent malalignment over the landmark-based manipulation of DRF. The risk of bias across the included studies and heterogeneity of 83% mandates further unbiased, high-quality studies to verify the findings of this review.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
52
审稿时长
39 weeks
期刊最新文献
A Case of Spastic Quadriplegia Remaining after Multiple Traumatic Injuries Complicated by Sepsis and Reversible Posterior Leukoencephalopathy Syndrome, as well as Delayed Multifocal Microbleeds. Acute Myocardial Infarction with Refractory Cardiogenic Shock after High-Voltage Electrocution: An Intriguing Case. Air Everywhere without Bowel Injury. Bed-up-head-elevated Position versus Supine Sniffing Position in Patients Undergoing Rapid Sequence Intubation Using Direct Laryngoscopy in the Emergency Department - A Randomized Controlled Trial. Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Acute Liver Injury in Sepsis Patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1