A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing suprapatellar versus infrapatellar approach intramedullary nailing for tibal shaft fractures

BackgroundThe application of the suprapatellar (SP) approach has challenged the traditional infrapatellar (IP) approach in the surgery treatment of tibial shaft fractures, yet the advantages and disadvantages still remain controversial. We included more high-quality studies for this meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the clinical outcomes and prognosis of both approaches and thus to provide new ideas for surgeons.MethodWe searched literatures from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases from January 2000 to December 2022. We extracted general information including sample size, gender, proportion of open fracture, follow-up time, and outcome indicators including entrance accuracy, fluoroscopy time, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, Lysholm score, VAS pain score, range of motion (ROM) function score, reposition accuracy, and revision cases. Cochrane Collaboration's tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate literature qualities. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.ResultsA total of 23 studies were generated that qualified for inclusion, 17 of which were used for meta-analysis. This study found statistically significant differences in coronal plane entrance accuracy, fluoroscopy time, Lysholm score, and VAS pain score.ConclusionThe results of our meta-analysis showed that the SP approach was significantly better than the IP approach in angle and distance entrance accuracy of coronal plane, angle entrance accuracy of sagittal plane, fluoroscopy time, Lysholm score, and VAS pain score. There were no significant differences in sagittal angle accuracy, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and ROM score.