动态固定与静态固定和腓骨钉治疗联合踝关节骨折的疗效比较:一项荟萃分析和系统综述。

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Annals of Joint Pub Date : 2024-09-06 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.21037/aoj-24-14
Thomas Cho, Amy Waters, Shiva Senthilkumar, Shradha Shendge, Jiayong Liu
{"title":"动态固定与静态固定和腓骨钉治疗联合踝关节骨折的疗效比较:一项荟萃分析和系统综述。","authors":"Thomas Cho, Amy Waters, Shiva Senthilkumar, Shradha Shendge, Jiayong Liu","doi":"10.21037/aoj-24-14","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Syndesmotic ankle fractures occur when there is damage to the syndesmosis complex, resulting in severe pain and instability. Treatment methods include static fixation, dynamic fixation, and fibular nailing. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes of these surgical interventions for syndesmotic ankle fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed and Embase were searched up until April 2024 for comparison studies that included at least two of the treatment methods and relevant functional outcomes and complication metrics. Review Manager 5.4 was used for statistical analyses, and a P value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Risk of bias was assessed with Review Manager 5.4. and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies with a total of 1,182 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to static fixation, dynamic fixation had a significantly higher Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) at both 1-year [standardized mean difference (SMD) =0.43; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22 to 0.65; P<0.05] and 2-year post-operation (SMD =0.76; 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.20; P<0.05). Dynamic fixation had a significantly lower reoperation rate than static fixation [risk ratio (RR) =0.55; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.83; P=0.004]. Compared to static fixation, fibular nail had a significantly higher OMAS at 1-year post-operation (SMD =0.28; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.53; P=0.03). Fibular nails had significantly lower infection (RR =0.12; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.37; P<0.05) and reoperation rates (RR =0.22; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.86; P=0.03) than static fixation. Compared to fibular nail, dynamic fixation had a significantly higher OMAS at both 1-year (SMD =1.07; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.31; P<0.05) and 2-year post-operation (SMD =1.03; 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.47; P<0.05). Dynamic fixation had a significantly higher reoperation rate compared to fibular nail (RR =20.41; 95% CI: 2.81 to 148.21; P=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dynamic fixation seems to be the superior treatment method, displaying better outcomes than static fixation and fibular nailing, with the fibular nail proving to be a viable alternative. Dynamic fixation should be the first choice of treatment for those with syndesmotic ankle fractures due to its clinical advantages compared to static fixation and fibular nailing.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>","PeriodicalId":44459,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Joint","volume":"9 ","pages":"36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11558278/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the outcomes of syndesmotic ankle fractures treated with dynamic fixation versus static fixation versus fibular nail: a meta-analysis and systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Cho, Amy Waters, Shiva Senthilkumar, Shradha Shendge, Jiayong Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.21037/aoj-24-14\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Syndesmotic ankle fractures occur when there is damage to the syndesmosis complex, resulting in severe pain and instability. Treatment methods include static fixation, dynamic fixation, and fibular nailing. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes of these surgical interventions for syndesmotic ankle fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed and Embase were searched up until April 2024 for comparison studies that included at least two of the treatment methods and relevant functional outcomes and complication metrics. Review Manager 5.4 was used for statistical analyses, and a P value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Risk of bias was assessed with Review Manager 5.4. and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies with a total of 1,182 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to static fixation, dynamic fixation had a significantly higher Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) at both 1-year [standardized mean difference (SMD) =0.43; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22 to 0.65; P<0.05] and 2-year post-operation (SMD =0.76; 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.20; P<0.05). Dynamic fixation had a significantly lower reoperation rate than static fixation [risk ratio (RR) =0.55; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.83; P=0.004]. Compared to static fixation, fibular nail had a significantly higher OMAS at 1-year post-operation (SMD =0.28; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.53; P=0.03). Fibular nails had significantly lower infection (RR =0.12; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.37; P<0.05) and reoperation rates (RR =0.22; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.86; P=0.03) than static fixation. Compared to fibular nail, dynamic fixation had a significantly higher OMAS at both 1-year (SMD =1.07; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.31; P<0.05) and 2-year post-operation (SMD =1.03; 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.47; P<0.05). Dynamic fixation had a significantly higher reoperation rate compared to fibular nail (RR =20.41; 95% CI: 2.81 to 148.21; P=0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dynamic fixation seems to be the superior treatment method, displaying better outcomes than static fixation and fibular nailing, with the fibular nail proving to be a viable alternative. Dynamic fixation should be the first choice of treatment for those with syndesmotic ankle fractures due to its clinical advantages compared to static fixation and fibular nailing.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Joint\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"36\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11558278/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Joint\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21037/aoj-24-14\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Joint","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/aoj-24-14","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:踝关节联合韧带骨折发生于踝关节联合韧带复合体受损时,会导致剧烈疼痛和不稳定。治疗方法包括静态固定、动态固定和腓骨钉。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较这些手术干预治疗踝关节联合韧带骨折的效果:方法:对PubMed和Embase进行了检索,检索时间截止到2024年4月,检索内容包括至少两种治疗方法以及相关功能结果和并发症指标的对比研究。使用Review Manager 5.4进行统计分析,P值≤0.05为具有统计学意义。使用Review Manager 5.4和纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估偏倚风险:共有19项研究符合纳入标准,共涉及1182名患者。与静态固定相比,动态固定在1年后的Olerud-Molander踝关节评分(OMAS)均显著高于静态固定[标准化平均差(SMD)=0.43;95%置信区间(CI):0.22至0.65;PC结论:与静态固定相比,动态固定在1年后的Olerud-Molander踝关节评分(OMAS)均显著高于静态固定]:与静态固定和腓骨钉相比,动态固定似乎是更优越的治疗方法,显示出更好的疗效,而腓骨钉被证明是一种可行的替代方法。与静态固定和腓骨钉相比,动态固定具有临床优势,应成为踝关节联合骨折患者的首选治疗方法:3.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of the outcomes of syndesmotic ankle fractures treated with dynamic fixation versus static fixation versus fibular nail: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Background: Syndesmotic ankle fractures occur when there is damage to the syndesmosis complex, resulting in severe pain and instability. Treatment methods include static fixation, dynamic fixation, and fibular nailing. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the outcomes of these surgical interventions for syndesmotic ankle fractures.

Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched up until April 2024 for comparison studies that included at least two of the treatment methods and relevant functional outcomes and complication metrics. Review Manager 5.4 was used for statistical analyses, and a P value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Risk of bias was assessed with Review Manager 5.4. and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.

Results: Nineteen studies with a total of 1,182 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared to static fixation, dynamic fixation had a significantly higher Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) at both 1-year [standardized mean difference (SMD) =0.43; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22 to 0.65; P<0.05] and 2-year post-operation (SMD =0.76; 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.20; P<0.05). Dynamic fixation had a significantly lower reoperation rate than static fixation [risk ratio (RR) =0.55; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.83; P=0.004]. Compared to static fixation, fibular nail had a significantly higher OMAS at 1-year post-operation (SMD =0.28; 95% CI: 0.03 to 0.53; P=0.03). Fibular nails had significantly lower infection (RR =0.12; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.37; P<0.05) and reoperation rates (RR =0.22; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.86; P=0.03) than static fixation. Compared to fibular nail, dynamic fixation had a significantly higher OMAS at both 1-year (SMD =1.07; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.31; P<0.05) and 2-year post-operation (SMD =1.03; 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.47; P<0.05). Dynamic fixation had a significantly higher reoperation rate compared to fibular nail (RR =20.41; 95% CI: 2.81 to 148.21; P=0.003).

Conclusions: Dynamic fixation seems to be the superior treatment method, displaying better outcomes than static fixation and fibular nailing, with the fibular nail proving to be a viable alternative. Dynamic fixation should be the first choice of treatment for those with syndesmotic ankle fractures due to its clinical advantages compared to static fixation and fibular nailing.

Level of evidence: 3.

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
Annals of Joint
Annals of Joint ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
-25.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
The role of anterolateral complex surgery and slope-reducing osteotomies in revision ACL reconstructions: a narrative review. Three- or four-part proximal humeral fractures in middle-aged and active elderly group of patients: a narrative review of treatment options. Weightlessness damaged the ultrastructure of knee cartilage and quadriceps muscle, aggravated the degeneration of cartilage. Diagnostic strategies for chronic lateral ankle instability: a narrative review. Bone loss in shoulder instability and shoulder arthroplasty.
×
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