[Operative versus non-operative treatment for three- or four-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials].

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of operative and non-operative treatment for three- or four-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients by meta-analysis.

Methods

The literature search was performed in Cochrance Library, Medline, Embase, SinoMed, CNKI, Wanfang data and CQVIP databases for operative and non-operative treatment of three- or four-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients, and searches of conference proceedings were also conducted. The data were extracted and a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3. The outcome measures included Constants score, pain and incidence rates of AVN, reoperation, osteoarthritis, nonunion.

Results

Six randomized controlled trials involving 264 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The differences of Constant scores (MD=0.47, 95% CI:-4.35-5.28, P=0.85), incidence of ANV (OR=0.56, 95% CI:0.25-1.24, P=0.15), incidence of osteoarthritis (OR=0.56, 95% CI:0.19-1.68, P=0.30), incidence of nonunion (OR=0.43, 95% CI:0.13-1.43, P=0.17) between operative group and non-operative group were not statistically significant. Operative treatment was better in pain score (MD=1.01, 95% CI:0.12-1.19, P=0.03) and had statistically significant higher reoperative rate (OR=3.97, 95% CI:1.45-10.92, P=0.007).

Conclusions

No evidence support that there is difference in Constant score and incidence rate of ANV, osteoarthritis, nonunion between operative and non-operative treatment for three- or four-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. More high quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine which treatment is more efficient.