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 50 条
  • [41] Extramedullary versus intramedullary fixation of stable trochanteric femoral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zeelenberg, Miliaan. L.
    Nugteren, Leendert H. T.
    Plaisier, A. Cornelis H.
    Loggers, Sverre A. I.
    Joosse, Pieter W.
    Den Hartog, Dennis C.
    Verhofstad, Michael H. J. G.
    van Lieshout, Esther M. M.
    ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2023, 143 (08) : 5065 - 5083
  • [42] External versus internal fixation for bicondylar tibial plateau fractures: systematic review and meta-analysis
    Metcalfe D.
    Hickson C.J.
    McKee L.
    Griffin X.L.
    Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2015, 16 (4) : 275 - 285
  • [43] Internal Fixation Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Nondisplaced Femoral Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Sattari, Shahab Aldin
    Guilbault, Ryan
    MacMahon, Aoife
    Salem, Hytham S. S.
    Khanuja, Harpal S. S.
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC TRAUMA, 2023, 37 (05) : E219 - E226
  • [44] Intramedullary Nailing Versus Plate Fixation for Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Amer, Kamil M.
    Kurland, Adam M.
    Smith, Brendan
    Abdo, Zuhdi
    Amer, Rami
    Vosbikian, Michael M.
    Ahmed, Irfan H.
    ARCHIVES OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-ABJS, 2022, 10 (08): : 661 - 667
  • [45] Extramedullary versus intramedullary fixation of stable trochanteric femoral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Miliaan L. Zeelenberg
    Leendert H. T. Nugteren
    A. Cornelis Plaisier
    Sverre A. I. Loggers
    Pieter Joosse
    Dennis Den Hartog
    Michael H. J. Verhofstad
    Esther M. M. van Lieshout
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2023, 143 : 5065 - 5083
  • [46] Intramedullary nail fixation versus open reduction and internal fixation for treatment of adult diaphyseal forearm fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Box, McKenna W.
    Stegelmann, Samuel D.
    Domingue, Grayson A.
    Wells, Monica E.
    Werthmann, Neil J.
    Potgieter, Cornelis J.
    Riehl, John T.
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2024, 19 (01):
  • [47] Suture fixation versus tension band wiring in simple displaced olecranon fractures - a study protocol
    Qvist, Andreas Haubjerg
    Christensen, Bjorn Borsoe
    DANISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2024, 71 (11):
  • [48] Anterograde Headless Cannulated Screw Fixation in the Treatment of Medial Malleolar Fractures: Evaluation of a New Technique and Its Outcomes
    Tekin, Ali Cagri
    Cabuk, Haluk
    Dedeoglu, Suleyman Semih
    Saygili, Mehmet Selcuk
    Adas, Mujdat
    Buyukkurt, Cem Dincay
    Gurbuz, Hakan
    Cakar, Murat
    Tekin, Zeynep Nilufer
    MEDICAL PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE, 2016, 25 (05) : 429 - 434
  • [49] Comparison between headless compression screws and tension band wires for the fixation of medial malleolar fractures: a prospective randomized trial
    Young Hwan Park
    Hyun Woo Cho
    Jung Woo Choi
    Hak Jun Kim
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2022, 142 : 2627 - 2633
  • [50] Outcome of isolated olecranon fractures in skeletally immature patients: comparison of open reduction and tension band wiring fixation versus closed reduction and percutaneous screw fixation
    Corradin M.
    Marengo L.
    Andreacchio A.
    Paonessa M.
    Giacometti V.
    Samba A.
    Rousset M.
    Canavese F.
    European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, 2016, 26 (5) : 469 - 476