• George D Chloros, Apostolos D Prodromidis, Jo Wilson, and Peter V Giannoudis.
• Academic Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
• Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022 Jun 1; 48 (3): 238724062387-2406.

PurposeTo compare the CFR-PEEK plates with conventional plates in fracture fixation with regards to clinical and radiological outcomes and complications.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in four online databases independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane methodology for systematic reviews. The identified relevant studies were assessed against predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Independent data extraction and assessment of risk of bias and study quality was carried out.ResultsNine studies (patient n = 361) out of 6594 records were included for analysis: 2 RCTs (n = 63), 3 prospective cohort studies (n = 151), and 4 retrospective cohort studies (n = 147). Studies were grouped per anatomic area of fixation. Four studies (n = 200) examined fixation of proximal humerus fractures. Two studies (n = 74) examined fixation of distal radius fractures. Two studies (n = 53) assessed outcomes of fixation of distal femur fractures. One study (n = 87) assessed the outcomes of fixation of ankle fractures. All nine studies reported very high union rates (from 91% in distal femur to 100% in upper limb) for the CFR-PEEK plate groups and low complication rates. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes, and rate of complications as compared to the conventional plate groups.ConclusionCFR-PEEK plates have high union rates in extremity fracture fixation similar to conventional plates with comparable good clinical outcomes and a very low and comparable rate of complications. Considering their advantages, CFR-PEEK plates seem to be valid alternative to conventional plating.© 2021. The Author(s).

20 keywords...

hide…