针对老年人移位肱骨近端骨折的初次与挽救性逆向全肩关节置换术:系统回顾与元分析》。

Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty Pub Date : 2020-09-15 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1177/2471549220949731
Patrick A Nelson, Changyow C Kwan, Vehniah K Tjong, Michael A Terry, Ujash Sheth
{"title":"针对老年人移位肱骨近端骨折的初次与挽救性逆向全肩关节置换术:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Patrick A Nelson, Changyow C Kwan, Vehniah K Tjong, Michael A Terry, Ujash Sheth","doi":"10.1177/2471549220949731","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is currently no established consensus on best treatment for complex proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) in the elderly. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a viable option in this population but many times is used as a salvage procedure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review of studies comparing RTSA as a primary treatment for PHF versus as a salvage procedure following failed open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), humeral intramedullary nailing, hemiarthroplasty (HA) or non-operative treatment was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Pooled outcomes and sub-group analyses assessing range of motion, patient reported outcomes and complications were examined using RevMan.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five articles were included in final analysis with 104 patients in the primary RTSA group and 147 in the salvage RTSA group compromising 251 total patients. Primary RTSA had a statistically significant advantage in range of motion (forward flexion and external rotation), patient reported outcomes, and complications compared to salvage RTSA.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the best available evidence, primary RTSA may result in slightly better patient reported outcomes, range of motion and a lower rate of complication when compared to salvage RTSA. Further high-quality prospective studies are needed to confirm the findings of the current review.</p>","PeriodicalId":73942,"journal":{"name":"Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty","volume":"4 ","pages":"2471549220949731"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/31/d8/10.1177_2471549220949731.PMC8282171.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Primary Versus Salvage Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Displaced Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Patrick A Nelson, Changyow C Kwan, Vehniah K Tjong, Michael A Terry, Ujash Sheth\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/2471549220949731\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is currently no established consensus on best treatment for complex proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) in the elderly. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a viable option in this population but many times is used as a salvage procedure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review of studies comparing RTSA as a primary treatment for PHF versus as a salvage procedure following failed open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), humeral intramedullary nailing, hemiarthroplasty (HA) or non-operative treatment was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Pooled outcomes and sub-group analyses assessing range of motion, patient reported outcomes and complications were examined using RevMan.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five articles were included in final analysis with 104 patients in the primary RTSA group and 147 in the salvage RTSA group compromising 251 total patients. Primary RTSA had a statistically significant advantage in range of motion (forward flexion and external rotation), patient reported outcomes, and complications compared to salvage RTSA.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Based on the best available evidence, primary RTSA may result in slightly better patient reported outcomes, range of motion and a lower rate of complication when compared to salvage RTSA. Further high-quality prospective studies are needed to confirm the findings of the current review.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73942,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty\",\"volume\":\"4 \",\"pages\":\"2471549220949731\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/31/d8/10.1177_2471549220949731.PMC8282171.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/2471549220949731\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2471549220949731","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前,关于老年人肱骨近端复杂骨折(PHF)的最佳治疗方法尚未达成共识。反向全肩关节置换术(RTSA)在这类人群中是一种可行的选择,但很多时候被用作一种挽救手术:方法:采用 PRISMA 指南对反向全肩关节置换术作为 PHF 的主要治疗方法与作为开放复位内固定术(ORIF)、肱骨髓内钉、半关节置换术(HA)或非手术治疗失败后的挽救手术的研究进行了系统性回顾。使用RevMan对汇总结果和亚组分析(评估活动范围、患者报告结果和并发症)进行了检查:最终分析纳入了五篇文章,其中初治 RTSA 组有 104 名患者,抢救 RTSA 组有 147 名患者,共计 251 名患者。与抢救性RTSA相比,初次RTSA在活动范围(前屈和外旋)、患者报告结果和并发症方面具有显著的统计学优势:根据现有的最佳证据,与挽救性 RTSA 相比,初次 RTSA 在患者报告的疗效、活动范围和并发症发生率方面可能略胜一筹。需要进一步开展高质量的前瞻性研究,以证实本综述的结论。
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
Primary Versus Salvage Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Displaced Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: There is currently no established consensus on best treatment for complex proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) in the elderly. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a viable option in this population but many times is used as a salvage procedure.

Methods: A systematic review of studies comparing RTSA as a primary treatment for PHF versus as a salvage procedure following failed open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), humeral intramedullary nailing, hemiarthroplasty (HA) or non-operative treatment was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Pooled outcomes and sub-group analyses assessing range of motion, patient reported outcomes and complications were examined using RevMan.

Results: Five articles were included in final analysis with 104 patients in the primary RTSA group and 147 in the salvage RTSA group compromising 251 total patients. Primary RTSA had a statistically significant advantage in range of motion (forward flexion and external rotation), patient reported outcomes, and complications compared to salvage RTSA.

Conclusions: Based on the best available evidence, primary RTSA may result in slightly better patient reported outcomes, range of motion and a lower rate of complication when compared to salvage RTSA. Further high-quality prospective studies are needed to confirm the findings of the current 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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Ninety-day venous thromboembolism incidence and associated risk factors after total and reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a national database analysis. Pre-operative injectable testosterone therapy is associated with increased five-year revision risk after total shoulder arthroplasty: a TriNetX database analysis. Outcomes of revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty after failed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. The reliability of the forgotten joint score for shoulder arthroplasty. Optimization of implant selection and positioning for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using three-dimensional computed tomography-guided simulation software with scapulothoracic motion.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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