Periprosthetic Distal Femoral Fractures Around a Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Meta-analysis Comparing Locking compression Plating and Retrograde Intramedullary Nailing

全膝关节置换术周围股骨远端骨折:锁定加压钢板固定术与逆行髓内钉固定术的荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

PURPOSE: The number of total knee replacements (TKRs) performed per year has been increasing annually and it is estimated that by 2030 demand would reach 3.48 million procedures per year in the United States Of America. The prevalence of periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around TKRs has followed this trend with incidences ranging from 0.3% to 3.5%. Distal femoral PPFs are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. When there is sufficient bone stock in the distal femur and a fracture pattern conducive to fixation, locking compression plating (LCP) and retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIMN) are commonly used fixation strategies. Conversely, in situations with loosening and deficient bone stock, a salvage procedure such as a distal femoral replacement is recognized as an alternative. This meta-analysis investigates the rates of non-union, re-operation, infection, and mortality for LCPs and RIMNs when performed for distal femoral PPFs fractures around TKRs. METHOD: A search was conducted to identify articles relevant to the management of distal femoral PPFs around TKRs in adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist. Articles meeting the inclusion criteria were then assessed for methodological quality using the methodological items for non-randomised studies (MINORS) criteria. Articles were reviewed, and data were compiled into tables for analysis. RESULTS: 10 articles met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 528 PPFs. The overall incidence of complications was: non-union 9.4%, re-operation 12.9%, infection 2.4%, and mortality 5.5%. This meta-analysis found no significant differences between RIMN and LCP in rates of non-union (9.2% vs 9.6%) re-operation (15.1% vs 11.3%), infection (2.1% vs 2.6%), and mortality (6.0% vs 5.2%), respectively. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in rates of non-union, re-operation, infection, and mortality between RIMN and LCP and both remain valid surgical treatment options.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。