Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023
Open reduction versus closed reduction in internal fixation of displaced femoral neck fracture in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
МетаанализСистематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lim Eic Ju, Kim Boo-Seop, Kim Minboo, Shon Hyun-Chul, Kim Chul-Ho
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The quality of reduction is an important factor affecting clinical outcomes for displaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs). However, concerns remain about the invasiveness of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) as compared to that of closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF), and the choice between ORIF and CRIF as an optimal treatment strategy for displaced pediatric FNF remains controversial.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies published up to December 22, 2022, that compared ORIF and CRIF techniques for treating FNF in children. Pooled analysis identified differences in surgical outcomes between ORIF and CRIF, especially regarding postoperative complications, such as osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), nonunion, coxa vara deformity, leg-length discrepancy LLD, and premature physeal closure (PPC).
RESULTS: We included 15 studies with 635 pediatric FNF cases in our review. Of these, 324 and 311 were treated with ORIF and CRIF, respectively. The pooled analysis revealed that no significant differences existed between each reduction technique for ONFH (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-1.56; P = 0.69), nonunion (OR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.18-1.47; P = 0.21), coxa vara deformity (OR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.20-1.72; P = 0.33), LLD (OR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.18-1.82; P = 0.35), and PPC (OR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.11-4.92; P = 0.74).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns about the invasiveness of ORIF, no differences in complications exist between ORIF and CRIF after FNF in children. Therefore, we believe that ORIF should be performed in FNF when the fracture is irreducible by closed manner.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies published up to December 22, 2022, that compared ORIF and CRIF techniques for treating FNF in children. Pooled analysis identified differences in surgical outcomes between ORIF and CRIF, especially regarding postoperative complications, such as osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), nonunion, coxa vara deformity, leg-length discrepancy LLD, and premature physeal closure (PPC).
RESULTS: We included 15 studies with 635 pediatric FNF cases in our review. Of these, 324 and 311 were treated with ORIF and CRIF, respectively. The pooled analysis revealed that no significant differences existed between each reduction technique for ONFH (odds ratio [OR] = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.51-1.56; P = 0.69), nonunion (OR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.18-1.47; P = 0.21), coxa vara deformity (OR = 0.58; 95% CI 0.20-1.72; P = 0.33), LLD (OR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.18-1.82; P = 0.35), and PPC (OR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.11-4.92; P = 0.74).
CONCLUSIONS: Despite concerns about the invasiveness of ORIF, no differences in complications exist between ORIF and CRIF after FNF in children. Therefore, we believe that ORIF should be performed in FNF when the fracture is irreducible by closed manner.