Y Zhao1, J Wang1, W Yao1, Q Cai1, Y Wang2, W Yuan3, S Gao4. 1. Department of Bone and Soft Tumor, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Cancer Hospital, No. 127 Dongming Road, Jinshui District, Zhengzhou, Henan, 450008, China. 2. Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan, 450000, China. 3. Department of Joint Surgery, Central Hospital of Zhoukou City, Zhoukou, Henan, 466000, China. 4. Department of Bone and Soft Tumor, Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Cancer Hospital, No. 127 Dongming Road, Jinshui District, Zhengzhou, Henan, 450008, China. xinqiangtang2008@126.com.
Abstract
We designed a study to compare the efficacy of five main therapeutic options, including external fixation, open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), dynamic compression plate (DCP), and intramedullary nail (IMN) in treating humeral shaft fractures. Our results indicated that MIPO and IMN were recommended as the optimal treatments for clinical use. PURPOSE: Nowadays, five main therapeutic options are used in treating humeral shaft fractures: external fixation, open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), dynamic compression plate (DCP), and intramedullary nail (IMN). Aiming to provide reliable evidence for clinical selection, we designed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the efficacy of these treatments. METHODS: NMA was conducted on Bayesian framework with software R 3.3.2 and STATA 13.0. Nonunion rate, radial nerve palsy rate, union time, complication rate, and infection rate were considered as primary outcomes. Mean operation time was the secondary outcome. The outcomes were measured by odds ratio (OR) value and corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrIs) or mean difference (MD) with 95% CrIs. Surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to show the ranking probability of each treatment. RESULTS: Our results indicated that ORPO had a higher risk of radial nerve palsy than MIPO (OR = 2.83, 95% CrIs = 1.28-6.23), and DCP had a better performance in preventing complications than IMN (OR = 0.31, 95% CrIs = 0.11-0.84); no other significant difference were observed. According to the SUCRA results, MIPO had a high-ranking probability in almost all outcomes, while external fixation had lowest values in the majority of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We recommended MIPO as the optimal treatment for humeral shaft fractures after taking all outcomes into consideration; IMN was also recommended for its relatively good performance, but its complication still needed to be noticed.
We designed a study to compare the efficacy of five main therapeutic options, including external fixation, open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), dynamic compression plate (DCP), and intramedullary nail (IMN) in treating humeral shaft fractures. Our results indicated that MIPO and IMN were recommended as the optimal treatments for clinical use. PURPOSE: Nowadays, five main therapeutic options are used in treating humeral shaft fractures: external fixation, open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), dynamic compression plate (DCP), and intramedullary nail (IMN). Aiming to provide reliable evidence for clinical selection, we designed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the efficacy of these treatments. METHODS: NMA was conducted on Bayesian framework with software R 3.3.2 and STATA 13.0. Nonunion rate, radial nerve palsy rate, union time, complication rate, and infection rate were considered as primary outcomes. Mean operation time was the secondary outcome. The outcomes were measured by odds ratio (OR) value and corresponding 95% credible intervals (CrIs) or mean difference (MD) with 95% CrIs. Surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was calculated to show the ranking probability of each treatment. RESULTS: Our results indicated that ORPO had a higher risk of radial nerve palsy than MIPO (OR = 2.83, 95% CrIs = 1.28-6.23), and DCP had a better performance in preventing complications than IMN (OR = 0.31, 95% CrIs = 0.11-0.84); no other significant difference were observed. According to the SUCRA results, MIPO had a high-ranking probability in almost all outcomes, while external fixation had lowest values in the majority of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We recommended MIPO as the optimal treatment for humeral shaft fractures after taking all outcomes into consideration; IMN was also recommended for its relatively good performance, but its complication still needed to be noticed.
Authors: Eben A Carroll; Mark Schweppe; Maxwell Langfitt; Anna N Miller; Jason J Halvorson Journal: J Am Acad Orthop Surg Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 3.020
Authors: J L Marsh; Theddy F Slongo; Julie Agel; J Scott Broderick; William Creevey; Thomas A DeCoster; Laura Prokuski; Michael S Sirkin; Bruce Ziran; Brad Henley; Laurent Audigé Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2007 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Stephen Craig Morris; Anirudh K Gowd; Avinesh Agarwalla; Wesley P Phipatanakul; Nirav H Amin; Joseph N Liu Journal: World J Orthop Date: 2022-09-18
Authors: Frank Joseph Paulus Beeres; Nicole van Veelen; Roderick Marijn Houwert; Björn Christian Link; Marilyn Heng; Matthias Knobe; Rolf Hendrik Herman Groenwold; Reto Babst; Bryan Joost Marinus van de Wall Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Date: 2021-07-05 Impact factor: 2.374