-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Reamed versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of femoral fractures: A meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials.
- A-Bing Li, Wei-Jiang Zhang, Wei-Jun Guo, Xin-Hua Wang, Hai-Ming Jin, and You-Ming Zhao.
- Department of Orthopaedics, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China.
- Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Jul 1; 95 (29): e4248.
Background And ObjectiveIntramedullary nailing is commonly used for treating femoral shaft fractures, one of the most common long bone fractures in adults. The reamed intramedullary nail is considered the standard implant for femoral fractures. This meta-analysis was performed to verify the superiority of reamed intramedullary nailing over unreamed intramedullary nailing in fractures of the femoral shaft in adults. Subgroup analysis of implant failure and secondary procedure was also performed.MethodsElectronic literature databases were used to identify relevant publications and included MEDLINE (Ovid interface), EMBASE (Ovid interface), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Wiley Online Library). The versions available on January 30, 2016, were utilized. Only human studies, which were designed as randomized controlled clinical trials, were included. Two authors independently evaluated the quality of original research publications and extracted data from the studies that met the criteria.ResultsAround 8 randomized controlled trials involving 1078 patients were included. Reamed intramedullary nailing was associated with shorter time to consolidation of the fracture (SMD = -0.62, 95% CI = -0.89 to -0.35, P < 0.00001), lower secondary procedure rate (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.10-0.62, P = 0.003), lower nonunion rate (OR = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.05-0.40, P < 0.01), and lower delayed-union rate (OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.07-0.49, P < 0.01) compared to unreamed intramedullary nailing. The 2 groups showed no significant differences in risk of implant failure (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.14-1.74, P = 0.27), mortality risk (OR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.19-4.68, P = 0.94), risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS; OR = 1.55, 95% CI 0.36-6.57, P = 0.55), or blood loss (SMD = 0.57, 95% CI = -0.22 to 1.36, P = 0.15).ConclusionReamed intramedullary nailing is correlated with shorter time to union and lower rates of delayed-union, nonunion, and reoperation. Reamed intramedullary nailing did not increase blood loss or the rates of ARDS, implant failure, and mortality compared to unreamed intramedullary nailing. Therefore, the treatment of femoral fractures using reamed intramedullary nailing is recommended.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.