Tension band wiring versus screw fixation for the treatment of medial malleolar fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:0
作者
Kim, Chul-Ho [1 ]
Ma, Dae Sung [2 ]
Yoon, Yong-Cheol [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Chung Ang Univ, Coll Med, Dept Orthoped Surg, Chung Ang Univ Hosp, Seoul, South Korea
[2] Dankook Univ Hosp, Trauma Ctr, Dept Thorac & Cardiovasc Surg, Cheonan Si, South Korea
[3] Gachon Univ, Coll Med, Trauma Ctr, Orthoped Trauma Div, Incheon, South Korea
[4] Gachon Univ, Trauma Ctr, Orthoped Trauma Div, Coll Med, 21 Namdong Daero,774 Beon Gil, Incheon 21565, South Korea
关键词
Medial malleolus fracture; Meta-analysis; Screw fixation; Systemic review; Tension band wiring; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.otsr.2022.103447
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Introduction: Tension band wiring (TBW) and screw fixation (SF) are common surgical treatments for medial malleolar fractures (MMFs); however, no systematic review has identified which fixation method is superior. This study aimed to determine the most optimal MMF fixation method by comparing the clinical and radiological outcomes of TBW and SF through a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.Hypothesis: We hypothesized that there may be differences in outcomes between TBW and SF for treating MMFs.Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies that compared TBW and SF for MMF treatment published through June 8, 2021. Fracture union, outcome scores, and postoperative complications were analyzed. Results: We included 10 studies with 512 MMF cases; 218 and 294 patients were treated with TBW and SF, respectively. Pooled analysis revealed no significant differences between them for all outcome variables, including the time to fracture union (mean difference = -0.59 weeks; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.82 to 0.64; p = 0.35; I2 = 70%), number of excellent or good outcomes based on the final Olerud and Molander Ankle score (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% CI, 0.53-5.02; p = 0.47; I2 = 0%), delayed union rate (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.34-2.59; p = 0.91; I2 = 17%), superficial infection rate (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.33-4.26; p = 0.79; I2 = 0%), and number of fixation failures (OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.16-1.74; p = 0.29; I2 = 13%).Conclusions: Both TBW and SF are excellent clinical and radiological methods for MMF fixation. However, an appropriate fixation method should be chosen according to the fracture type and size and bone quality considering the advantages and disadvantages of each method. Level of evidence: III, meta-analysis.& COPY; 2022 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
Aher D, 2019, Int J Orthop Res, V1, P004
[2]  
Altaei DAS, 2020, Int J Surg Sci, V4, P137
[3]  
Appalaraju S, 2017, J Orthop Trauma Rehabil, P9
[4]   Single-Screw Fixation Compared With Double Screw Fixation for Treatment of Medial Malleolar Fractures: A Prospective Randomized Trial [J].
Buckley, Richard ;
Kwek, Ernest ;
Duffy, Paul ;
Korley, Robert ;
Puloski, Shannon ;
Buckley, Andrew ;
Martin, Ryan ;
Moller, Emilia Rydberg ;
Schneider, Prism .
JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2018, 32 (11) :548-553
[5]   Isolated Medial Malleolus Fractures: Conventional Techniques Versus Headless Compression Screw Fixation [J].
Bulut, Tugrul ;
Gursoy, Merve .
JOURNAL OF FOOT & ANKLE SURGERY, 2018, 57 (03) :552-556
[6]  
Burwell H N, 1965, J Bone Joint Surg Br, V47, P634
[7]  
Carter TH, 2019, BONE JOINT J, V101B, P512, DOI [10.1302/0301-620X.101B5.BJJ-2019-0070, 10.1302/0301-620x.101B5.BJJ-2019-0070]
[8]  
Davidovitch RI, 2009, BULL HOSP JT DIS, V67, P318
[9]  
Deeks J, 2011, Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (Cochrane Book Series
[10]   Comparison of Surgical Techniques of 111 Medial Malleolar Fractures Classified by Fracture Geometry [J].
Ebraheim, Nabil A. ;
Ludwig, Todd ;
Weston, John T. ;
Carroll, Trevor ;
Liu, Jiayong .
FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 35 (05) :471-477