Kaifeng Gan1,2, Dingli Xu3, Keqi Hu4, Wei Wu5, Yandong Shen4. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital, Xingning Road No. 57, Ningbo City, 315040, People's Republic of China. gankaifeng@163.com. 2. Medical School of Ningbo University, Ningbo City, People's Republic of China. gankaifeng@163.com. 3. Medical School of Ningbo University, Ningbo City, People's Republic of China. 4. Department of Orthopaedics, Ningbo Medical Center Lihuili Hospital, Xingning Road No. 57, Ningbo City, 315040, People's Republic of China. 5. Department of Orthopaedics, Second Hospital of Ningbo, Ningbo City, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the current randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dynamic fixations (DFs) and static fixations (SFs) in treating distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injuries (DTSIs). METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and EMBASE were systematically searched according to the PRISMA guidelines to identify RCTs comparing the DFs and SFs for DTSIs. Included studies were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Postoperative functional scores, range of motion (ROM), complication rate, and incidence of reoperation were statistically analyzed using review manager software, and a p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Five RCTs with a total of 282 patients were included. Analysis revealed statistically significant differences in favor of DFs with regard to American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot score at a follow-up less than 6 months (MD 5.29; 95% CI 0.99-9.59; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%) and at a follow-up more than 2 years (MD 7.53; 95% CI 3.30-11.76; p = 0.0005; I2 = 0%), Olerud-Molander ankle (OMA) score at 1 year follow-up (MD 4.62; 95% CI 0.91-8.32; p = 0.01; I2 = 14%), and overall postoperative complication rate (RR 0.22; 95% CI 0.07-0.77; p = 0.02; I2 = 73%). There was no significant difference between the DFs and SFs regarding ROM and incidence of reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: The DF procedure leads to significantly improved functional scores as well as lower rate of overall postoperative complications when compared with SF procedure. On the basis of results of this meta-analysis, the DF should be recommended for managing the DTSI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
PURPOSE: To analyze the current randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dynamic fixations (DFs) and static fixations (SFs) in treating distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injuries (DTSIs). METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and EMBASE were systematically searched according to the PRISMA guidelines to identify RCTs comparing the DFs and SFs for DTSIs. Included studies were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Postoperative functional scores, range of motion (ROM), complication rate, and incidence of reoperation were statistically analyzed using review manager software, and a p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Five RCTs with a total of 282 patients were included. Analysis revealed statistically significant differences in favor of DFs with regard to American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot score at a follow-up less than 6 months (MD 5.29; 95% CI 0.99-9.59; p = 0.02; I2 = 0%) and at a follow-up more than 2 years (MD 7.53; 95% CI 3.30-11.76; p = 0.0005; I2 = 0%), Olerud-Molander ankle (OMA) score at 1 year follow-up (MD 4.62; 95% CI 0.91-8.32; p = 0.01; I2 = 14%), and overall postoperative complication rate (RR 0.22; 95% CI 0.07-0.77; p = 0.02; I2 = 73%). There was no significant difference between the DFs and SFs regarding ROM and incidence of reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: The DF procedure leads to significantly improved functional scores as well as lower rate of overall postoperative complications when compared with SF procedure. On the basis of results of this meta-analysis, the DF should be recommended for managing the DTSI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
Authors: Julian P T Higgins; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Peter Jüni; David Moher; Andrew D Oxman; Jelena Savovic; Kenneth F Schulz; Laura Weeks; Jonathan A C Sterne Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-10-18
Authors: Jan Niklas Altmeppen; Christian Colcuc; Christian Balser; Yves Gramlich; Alexander Klug; Oliver Neun; Sebastian Manegold; Reinhard Hoffmann; Sebastian Fischer Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-30 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Francesco Pogliacomi; Massimo De Filippo; Daniele Casalini; Alberto Longhi; Fabrizio Tacci; Rocco Perotta; Francesco Pagnini; Silvio Tocco; Francesco Ceccarelli Journal: World J Orthop Date: 2021-05-18
Authors: Neel K Patel; Conor I Murphy; Thomas R Pfeiffer; Jan-Hendrik Naendrup; Jason P Zlotnicki; Richard E Debski; MaCalus V Hogan; Volker Musahl Journal: J Exp Orthop Date: 2020-03-30