Open and closed reduction methods for intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.

INTRODUCTION

Closed reduction and intramedullary nailing is the preferred surgical intervention for femoral shaft fractures. Open reduction involves opening the fracture site and is performed in various circumstances. Comparative studies of the approaches have conflicting results. We sought to compare the outcomes and complications of open and closed reduction for intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic review of comparative studies included the databases and registers PubMed (Medline), Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central (PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42022325382). Additional studies were identified through hand and citation searching. Two reviewers independently extracted data. The standardized mean difference and 95% confidence intervals were determined for continuous variables, whereas odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were assessed for dichotomous variables.

RESULTS

Closed reduction had a higher pooled union rate (93.93%, 92.02%), an increased odds ratio for union (OR = 1.624 [95% CI: 1.004, 2.624]; p = .048), and a faster time to union (SMD = -0.292 [95% CI: -0.549, -0.0.035]; p = .026). There were no differences in operative time (SMD = 0.128 [95% CI: -0.700, 0.956] p = .762) or overall complication rate (OR = 1.314 [95% CI: 0.966, 1.787] p = .082).

CONCLUSIONS

Closed reduction has the advantage of higher union rates, quicker time to union, and lower overall infection compared to open reduction for intramedullary nailing of femoral shaft fractures. Open reduction remains a reasonable alternative with acceptable union rates when closed reduction is not feasible.