Background：There is conflicting evidence as to whether the femoral head should be preserved or replaced in elderly patients with displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures.In this article,we performed a systemati...Background：There is conflicting evidence as to whether the femoral head should be preserved or replaced in elderly patients with displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures.In this article,we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the short-and long-term effectiveness of arthroplasty （AR） and internal fixation （IF）.Methods：PubMed,Embase,and the Cochrane Library were searched systematically up to January 2016.All randomized controlled trials directly comparing the effectiveness of AR and IF for displaced intracapsular fracture were retrieved with no limitation on language or publication year.Results：In total,eight prospective randomized studies involving 2206 patients were included.The results of our study showed that patients in the AR group reported significantly lower complication （risk ratio：0.56,95% confidence interval [CI] =0.38-0.80）,re-operation （risk ratio：0.17,95% CI =0.13-0.22）,revision rates （risk ratio：0.11,95% CI：0.08-0.16）,and better function compared with their IF counterparts,and they were less likely to suffer postoperative pain.No statistically significant differences for the rates of mortality,infection,and/or deep vein thrombosis between AR and IF were found.Conclusions：Based on our analysis,we recommend that AR should be used as the primary treatment for displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures in the elderly.However,IF may be appropriate for those who are very frail.展开更多
Background Operative decision-making of Pilon fractures are of great challenges until now. The aim of this study was to investigate the guidance of the four-column theory in decision-making therapeutic strategies for ...Background Operative decision-making of Pilon fractures are of great challenges until now. The aim of this study was to investigate the guidance of the four-column theory in decision-making therapeutic strategies for Pilon fractures and its result. Methods One hundred and ten cases （107 patients） of Pilon fractures classified by the four-column theory and treated by ORIF, were reviewed. According to the four-column classification scheme, lateral column of 85 cases, posterior column of 66 cases, medial column of 77 cases, and anterior column of 61 cases are involved. Among all the 110 cases, single column of 14 cases, two columns of 46 cases, three columns of 17 cases, and all of four columns of 33 cases are involved. Results One hundred and eight cases have been followed up. The average follow up time is 14.7 months, varying between 7 and 52 months. The average healing time is 3.6 months, ranging from 2.5 to 8.0 months. Reduction of 86.1% reviewed Pilon cases are good or acceptable according to Burwell and Charley＇s Radiology Evaluation System. Ankle function of 87.1% cases are excellent or good according to the AOFAS evaluation system. Conclusion As a simple and comprehensive classification, the four-column classification can contribute to reasonable operation decision-making and good prognosis of Pilon fracture.展开更多
背景:肱骨干骨折应选择钢板还是髓内针内固定,目前仍存在争议。一些研究比较了二者的疗效,但得出的结论不甚相同。针对这些对比性研究的系统评价和Meta分析研究,因为纳入研究数目及对研究数据提取的差异,得出的结论也不尽相同。目的:系...背景:肱骨干骨折应选择钢板还是髓内针内固定,目前仍存在争议。一些研究比较了二者的疗效,但得出的结论不甚相同。针对这些对比性研究的系统评价和Meta分析研究,因为纳入研究数目及对研究数据提取的差异,得出的结论也不尽相同。目的:系统评价钢板内固定与髓内针固定治疗成人肱骨干骨折的疗效。方法:计算机检索PubMed、MEDLINE、CINAHL(Cumulative Index to Nursing&Allied Health Literature)、EBM(Evidence-Based Medicine)、中国生物医学文献数据库、万方数据知识服务平台和中国学术期刊网。收集钢板内固定与髓内针固定比较治疗成人肱骨干骨折的随机或半随机的临床试验,应用Jadad评价纳入研究的方法学质量,并提取有效数据采用Stata 12.0软件进行Meta分析。结果与结论:共纳入15个随机或半随机的临床试验,其中4个半随机试验,11个随机试验。结果显示交锁髓内针固定会导致并发症风险增高(OR=0.37(0.19,0.59),P=0.00)。发表偏倚Egger’s检验P=0.91,无显著性发表偏倚。再手术发生上交锁髓内针治疗的风险增高(OR=0.28(0.14,0.57),P=0.00),Egger’s检验P=0.69。肩部撞击发生率髓内针固定要显著高于钢板固定(OR=0.13(0.05,0.35),P=0.00),肱骨干骨折后感染、骨不连、内固定失效、医源性神经损伤、手术时间及骨折愈合时间比较无显著性差异。说明与钢板内固定相比较,髓内针固定治疗成人肱骨干骨折容易导致肩部撞击的发生,导致并发症、再手术风险增高。感染、骨不连、内固定失效、医源性神经损伤、手术时间及骨折愈合时间等方面无显著性差异。展开更多
基金This work was supported by the grant from the National Natural Science Foundation of China （No. 81572124）.
文摘Background：There is conflicting evidence as to whether the femoral head should be preserved or replaced in elderly patients with displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures.In this article,we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the short-and long-term effectiveness of arthroplasty （AR） and internal fixation （IF）.Methods：PubMed,Embase,and the Cochrane Library were searched systematically up to January 2016.All randomized controlled trials directly comparing the effectiveness of AR and IF for displaced intracapsular fracture were retrieved with no limitation on language or publication year.Results：In total,eight prospective randomized studies involving 2206 patients were included.The results of our study showed that patients in the AR group reported significantly lower complication （risk ratio：0.56,95% confidence interval [CI] =0.38-0.80）,re-operation （risk ratio：0.17,95% CI =0.13-0.22）,revision rates （risk ratio：0.11,95% CI：0.08-0.16）,and better function compared with their IF counterparts,and they were less likely to suffer postoperative pain.No statistically significant differences for the rates of mortality,infection,and/or deep vein thrombosis between AR and IF were found.Conclusions：Based on our analysis,we recommend that AR should be used as the primary treatment for displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures in the elderly.However,IF may be appropriate for those who are very frail.
文摘Background Operative decision-making of Pilon fractures are of great challenges until now. The aim of this study was to investigate the guidance of the four-column theory in decision-making therapeutic strategies for Pilon fractures and its result. Methods One hundred and ten cases （107 patients） of Pilon fractures classified by the four-column theory and treated by ORIF, were reviewed. According to the four-column classification scheme, lateral column of 85 cases, posterior column of 66 cases, medial column of 77 cases, and anterior column of 61 cases are involved. Among all the 110 cases, single column of 14 cases, two columns of 46 cases, three columns of 17 cases, and all of four columns of 33 cases are involved. Results One hundred and eight cases have been followed up. The average follow up time is 14.7 months, varying between 7 and 52 months. The average healing time is 3.6 months, ranging from 2.5 to 8.0 months. Reduction of 86.1% reviewed Pilon cases are good or acceptable according to Burwell and Charley＇s Radiology Evaluation System. Ankle function of 87.1% cases are excellent or good according to the AOFAS evaluation system. Conclusion As a simple and comprehensive classification, the four-column classification can contribute to reasonable operation decision-making and good prognosis of Pilon fracture.
文摘背景:肱骨干骨折应选择钢板还是髓内针内固定,目前仍存在争议。一些研究比较了二者的疗效,但得出的结论不甚相同。针对这些对比性研究的系统评价和Meta分析研究,因为纳入研究数目及对研究数据提取的差异,得出的结论也不尽相同。目的:系统评价钢板内固定与髓内针固定治疗成人肱骨干骨折的疗效。方法:计算机检索PubMed、MEDLINE、CINAHL(Cumulative Index to Nursing&Allied Health Literature)、EBM(Evidence-Based Medicine)、中国生物医学文献数据库、万方数据知识服务平台和中国学术期刊网。收集钢板内固定与髓内针固定比较治疗成人肱骨干骨折的随机或半随机的临床试验,应用Jadad评价纳入研究的方法学质量,并提取有效数据采用Stata 12.0软件进行Meta分析。结果与结论:共纳入15个随机或半随机的临床试验,其中4个半随机试验,11个随机试验。结果显示交锁髓内针固定会导致并发症风险增高(OR=0.37(0.19,0.59),P=0.00)。发表偏倚Egger’s检验P=0.91,无显著性发表偏倚。再手术发生上交锁髓内针治疗的风险增高(OR=0.28(0.14,0.57),P=0.00),Egger’s检验P=0.69。肩部撞击发生率髓内针固定要显著高于钢板固定(OR=0.13(0.05,0.35),P=0.00),肱骨干骨折后感染、骨不连、内固定失效、医源性神经损伤、手术时间及骨折愈合时间比较无显著性差异。说明与钢板内固定相比较,髓内针固定治疗成人肱骨干骨折容易导致肩部撞击的发生,导致并发症、再手术风险增高。感染、骨不连、内固定失效、医源性神经损伤、手术时间及骨折愈合时间等方面无显著性差异。
