[Minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis versus open reduction and internal fixation for distal tibial fractures in adults: a meta-analysis].

OBJECTIVE

To perform a meta-analysis on clinical outcomes of minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) or open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for distal tibial fractures in adults.

METHODS

Pubmed database (from 1968 to March 2014), Cochrane library and CNKI database (from 1998 to March 2014) were searched. Case-control study on minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) or open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for distal tibial fractures in adults were chosen,and postoperative infection, operative time, blood loss, fracture nonunion rate, delayed union,fracture malunion rate were seen as evaluation index for meta analysis. The system review was performed using the method recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

Totally 5 studies (366 patients) were enrolled. Meta-analysis showed that there were significant meaning in postoperative infection between MIPPO and ORIF [OR = 0.23,95% CI (0.06,0.92), P = 0.04]; fracture nonunion rate in MIPPO was lower than in ORIF group [OR = 0.16, 95% CI (0.03,0.76), P = 0.02]; operative time in MIPPO was shorter than in ORIF group, and had significant difference [MD = -14.42, 95% CI (-27.79, -1.05), P < 0.05]; blood loss in MIPPO was less than in ORIF group [MD= -87.17,95%CI (-99.20, -75.15), P < 0.05]; there was no obviously meaning in delayed union between two groups.

CONCLUSION

For distal tibial fractures in adults, MIPPO has, advantages of short operative time, less blood loss, lower incidence of infection and fracture non-uniom, but with high fracture malunion rate. MIPPO for distal tibial fractures in adults is better than ORIF, and the best treatment should choose according to patient's condition.