Zhao Chen1, Dawei Han2, Qingyu Wang3, Lianghua Li4. 1. Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, 350100, China. Electronic address: 617271952@qq.com. 2. People' S Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, 350003, China. Electronic address: 457565911@qq.com. 3. People' S Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, 350003, China. Electronic address: 570714301@qq.com. 4. People' S Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fuzhou, 350003, China. Electronic address: chenzhao_465@126.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fractures of the pediatric femoral shaft are uncommon, although serious injuries could lead to long-term disability, pain and an impaired quality of life. There are 4 main interventions: cast (C), plate fixation (PF), titanium elastic nail (TEN) and external fixation (EF). However, for pediatric patients under the age of 16, which intervention is the best choice remains a controversial topic. Therefore, a comprehensive network meta-analysis (NMA) is needed to summarize existing studies and to compare the safety and efficacy of the interventions for pediatric femoral shaft fractures. METHODS: We searched through eight electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, Wangfang, and VIP) for randomized controlled trials of femoral shaft fracture in pediatric patients, which were published until the end of March 2020. We performed a Bayesian NMA to integrate the adverse events and fracture union time of all interventions. RESULT: Twenty-three randomized controlled trials with a total number of 1627 patients were included in our NMA. Among these patients, 386 patients underwent C, 524 patients underwent PF, 574 patients underwent TEN, and 143 patients underwent EF. In terms of adverse events, C had the lowest infection rates and TEN the second lowest infection rates. TEN also had the lowest anchylosis and malunion rates. In addition, TEN had a lower fracture union time than C, PF and EF. Notably, C showed the weakest effects on reducing malunion rates in pediatric patients. CONCLUSION: This current study indicated that TEN has potential superior clinical outcomes in pediatric femoral shaft fractures compared to C, PF and PF. However, high-quality large sample RCTs are still needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
BACKGROUND:Fractures of the pediatric femoral shaft are uncommon, although serious injuries could lead to long-term disability, pain and an impaired quality of life. There are 4 main interventions: cast (C), plate fixation (PF), titanium elastic nail (TEN) and external fixation (EF). However, for pediatric patients under the age of 16, which intervention is the best choice remains a controversial topic. Therefore, a comprehensive network meta-analysis (NMA) is needed to summarize existing studies and to compare the safety and efficacy of the interventions for pediatric femoral shaft fractures. METHODS: We searched through eight electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, Wangfang, and VIP) for randomized controlled trials of femoral shaft fracture in pediatric patients, which were published until the end of March 2020. We performed a Bayesian NMA to integrate the adverse events and fracture union time of all interventions. RESULT: Twenty-three randomized controlled trials with a total number of 1627 patients were included in our NMA. Among these patients, 386 patients underwent C, 524 patients underwent PF, 574 patients underwent TEN, and 143 patients underwent EF. In terms of adverse events, C had the lowest infection rates and TEN the second lowest infection rates. TEN also had the lowest anchylosis and malunion rates. In addition, TEN had a lower fracture union time than C, PF and EF. Notably, C showed the weakest effects on reducing malunion rates in pediatric patients. CONCLUSION: This current study indicated that TEN has potential superior clinical outcomes in pediatric femoral shaft fractures compared to C, PF and PF. However, high-quality large sample RCTs are still needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.