Objective:To compare the efficacy of open reduction and volar locking plate internal fixation with closed reduction and external fixation in the treatment of distal radius fractures by using meta analysis.Methods:The ...Objective:To compare the efficacy of open reduction and volar locking plate internal fixation with closed reduction and external fixation in the treatment of distal radius fractures by using meta analysis.Methods:The databases of CNKI,Wanfang,Weipu,Chinese biomedical literature,Pubmed,Embase,and Cochrane Library were retrieved,and the randomized controlled studies that directly compared the efficacy of plate internal fixation and closed reduction external fixation in the treatment of distal radius fractures published publicly from the establishment of the database to April 2023 were collected.The two researchers independently screened the retrieved literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,extracted data,used Cochrane risk bias assessment tool for quality assessment,and used RevMan 5.4 software for meta analysis.Results:A total of 10 randomized controlled trials were included,all of which were in English.There were 1042 patients in total,and 9 of them were rated as low risk.Meta analysis results showed that one year after the treatment of distal radius fracture with volar locking plate internal fixation,DASH score[MD=-5.64,95%CI(-7.21,-4.06),P<0.00001];One year later,PRWE score[MD=-5.90,95%CI(-8.88,-2.92),P=0.001];Palm flexion[MD=5.92,95%CI(1.29,10.55),P=0.01];Pronation[MD=2.48,95%CI(0.59,4.36),P=0.01];Postrotation[MD=4.73,95%CI(2.15,7.31),P=0.0003];Grip strength[MD=0.61,95%CI(0.12,1.10),P=0.02];palmar tilt angle[MD=9.84,95%CI(5.66,14.02),P<0.00001];Radial inclination[MD=4.33,95%CI(2.97,5.69),P<0.00001]was superior to closed reduction plaster or splint external fixation.One year later,the European Five dimensional Health Scale(EQ-5D-5L)score[MD=0.02,95%CI(-0.01,0.05),P=0.27];Back extension[MD=2.22,95%CI(-4.15,8.59),P=0.49];Ulnar deviation[MD=3.49,95%CI(-0.80,7.78),P=0.11];Radial deviation[MD=2.05,95%CI(-2.39,6.50),P=0.37];Ulnar variance[MD=-1.14,95%CI(-3.16,0.88),P=0.27];There was no significant difference in complications[MD=0.77,95%CI(0.54,1.10),P=0.16](P>0.05).Conclusion:Based on the current clinical data,internal fixation with volar locking plate is more conducive to mid-term DASH score and grip strength recovery than closed reduction plaster or splint external fixation,but there is no significant difference in the quality of life and complications of patients.For adult distal radius fractures,surgical indications should be carefully grasped,and non operative treatment should be given priority.展开更多
目的探讨桡骨远端不稳定型骨折的最佳治疗方法。方法对2005年7月至2010年7月佛山市中医院收治的分别采用闭合复位夹板外固定、闭合复位支架外固定、切开复位LCP内固定方法治疗的204例桡骨远端不稳定型骨折的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结...目的探讨桡骨远端不稳定型骨折的最佳治疗方法。方法对2005年7月至2010年7月佛山市中医院收治的分别采用闭合复位夹板外固定、闭合复位支架外固定、切开复位LCP内固定方法治疗的204例桡骨远端不稳定型骨折的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果所有患者均获随防,平均16个月,按Gartland and Werley标准评分:夹板组优良率为70.6%,支架组及LCP组优良率均为83.8%。其中A型骨折3种治疗方法的优良率无明显差别,B型骨折中LCP内固定的优良率最高,C型骨折中的支架外固定的优良率最高。放射学用Lidstrom分级评价:支架组和LCP组功能复位效果较夹板组好。并发症发生率LCP组明显小于夹板组及支架组。结论桡骨远端不稳定型骨折,治疗方法可根据AO分型的不同进行选择,其中支架外固定及切开复位LCP内固定疗效差别不大,均明显好于夹板外固定,但因夹板外固定价廉及治疗简便,仍可用于部分A型骨折中。展开更多
基金2022 Key Specialty Construction Project of Traditional Chinese Medicine:Traditional Chinese Orthopedics and Traumatology Department (No.962042)2020 Regional Traditional Chinese Medicine (Orthopedics and Traumatology)Diagnosis and Treatment Center (Jin Wei Zhong[2020]No.5)。
文摘Objective:To compare the efficacy of open reduction and volar locking plate internal fixation with closed reduction and external fixation in the treatment of distal radius fractures by using meta analysis.Methods:The databases of CNKI,Wanfang,Weipu,Chinese biomedical literature,Pubmed,Embase,and Cochrane Library were retrieved,and the randomized controlled studies that directly compared the efficacy of plate internal fixation and closed reduction external fixation in the treatment of distal radius fractures published publicly from the establishment of the database to April 2023 were collected.The two researchers independently screened the retrieved literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria,extracted data,used Cochrane risk bias assessment tool for quality assessment,and used RevMan 5.4 software for meta analysis.Results:A total of 10 randomized controlled trials were included,all of which were in English.There were 1042 patients in total,and 9 of them were rated as low risk.Meta analysis results showed that one year after the treatment of distal radius fracture with volar locking plate internal fixation,DASH score[MD=-5.64,95%CI(-7.21,-4.06),P<0.00001];One year later,PRWE score[MD=-5.90,95%CI(-8.88,-2.92),P=0.001];Palm flexion[MD=5.92,95%CI(1.29,10.55),P=0.01];Pronation[MD=2.48,95%CI(0.59,4.36),P=0.01];Postrotation[MD=4.73,95%CI(2.15,7.31),P=0.0003];Grip strength[MD=0.61,95%CI(0.12,1.10),P=0.02];palmar tilt angle[MD=9.84,95%CI(5.66,14.02),P<0.00001];Radial inclination[MD=4.33,95%CI(2.97,5.69),P<0.00001]was superior to closed reduction plaster or splint external fixation.One year later,the European Five dimensional Health Scale(EQ-5D-5L)score[MD=0.02,95%CI(-0.01,0.05),P=0.27];Back extension[MD=2.22,95%CI(-4.15,8.59),P=0.49];Ulnar deviation[MD=3.49,95%CI(-0.80,7.78),P=0.11];Radial deviation[MD=2.05,95%CI(-2.39,6.50),P=0.37];Ulnar variance[MD=-1.14,95%CI(-3.16,0.88),P=0.27];There was no significant difference in complications[MD=0.77,95%CI(0.54,1.10),P=0.16](P>0.05).Conclusion:Based on the current clinical data,internal fixation with volar locking plate is more conducive to mid-term DASH score and grip strength recovery than closed reduction plaster or splint external fixation,but there is no significant difference in the quality of life and complications of patients.For adult distal radius fractures,surgical indications should be carefully grasped,and non operative treatment should be given priority.
文摘目的探讨桡骨远端不稳定型骨折的最佳治疗方法。方法对2005年7月至2010年7月佛山市中医院收治的分别采用闭合复位夹板外固定、闭合复位支架外固定、切开复位LCP内固定方法治疗的204例桡骨远端不稳定型骨折的临床资料进行回顾性分析。结果所有患者均获随防,平均16个月,按Gartland and Werley标准评分:夹板组优良率为70.6%,支架组及LCP组优良率均为83.8%。其中A型骨折3种治疗方法的优良率无明显差别,B型骨折中LCP内固定的优良率最高,C型骨折中的支架外固定的优良率最高。放射学用Lidstrom分级评价:支架组和LCP组功能复位效果较夹板组好。并发症发生率LCP组明显小于夹板组及支架组。结论桡骨远端不稳定型骨折,治疗方法可根据AO分型的不同进行选择,其中支架外固定及切开复位LCP内固定疗效差别不大,均明显好于夹板外固定,但因夹板外固定价廉及治疗简便,仍可用于部分A型骨折中。
