Interlocking intramedullary nails versus external fixation in treatment of open fractures of the tibia and fibula: a meta-analysis

艾自胜,于淼,梅炯,蔡新宇,刘欢,唐玉洪
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3977/j.issn.1005-8478.2017.08.09
2017-01-01
Abstract:[Objective] To systematically evaluate the efficacy of interlocking intramedullary nails versus external fixation in the treatment of open fractures of the tibia and fibula,and to provide a reference for clinical practice and research.[Methods] A literature search was performed in CNKI,VIP database,WanFang Data,PubMed,and Web of Science to collect the clinical studies which compared the efficacy of interlocking intramedullary nail versus external fixation in the treatment of open fractures of the tibia and fibula published up to July 2015.A meta-analysis was performed using Stata 13.0 after quality assessment.[Results] A total of 163 studies were collected,and only 14 of them were included in the mcta-analysis involving 1101 patients with open fractures of the tibia and fibula.The patients were divided into interlocking intramedullary nail group (n =517) and external fixation group (n =584).There was a significant difference in the excellent and good results rate (Johner-Wruh criteria) between the two groups (OR =2.21,95% CI =1.48-3.31,P =0.0001).There were no significant differences in postoperative infection rate (OR =1.52,95% CI =0.91-2.55,P =0.291),fracture healing time (SMD =-0.38,95% CI =-1.08-0.33,P =0.296),the rate of nonunion and delayed union (OR =1.38,95% CI =0.79-2.44,P =0.266),and the rate of malunion (OR=1.22,95% CI=0.46-3.26,P=0.693) between the two groups.[Conclusions] Compared with external fixation,interlocking intramedullary nails has better clinical efficacy in the treatment of open fractures of the tibia and fibula.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?