PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the clinical efficacy of intramedullary fixation (IF) vs. plate fixation (PF) in the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a computerized search of the electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Medlineand Chinese Journal Full-text Database) from the establishment of the database to the end of November 2022. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration\'s \"Risk of bias\". Comparisons between the two groups were based on 8 variables, including Constant score, disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score, surgery time, length of incision, hospital stay; time to union, blood loss and infection.
UNASSIGNED: Thirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising a total of 928 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that IF can benefit midshaft clavicle fractures with a reduced surgery time and hospital stay, a smaller incision, a better shoulder function (DASH score), shorter time to union and lower rate of infection compared with PF. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of Constant score at 12-month follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: IF is superior to PF for the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures.
UNASSIGNED: We conducted a computerized search of the electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Medlineand Chinese Journal Full-text Database) from the establishment of the database to the end of November 2022. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration\'s \"Risk of bias\". Comparisons between the two groups were based on 8 variables, including Constant score, disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score, surgery time, length of incision, hospital stay; time to union, blood loss and infection.
UNASSIGNED: Thirteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising a total of 928 patients were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that IF can benefit midshaft clavicle fractures with a reduced surgery time and hospital stay, a smaller incision, a better shoulder function (DASH score), shorter time to union and lower rate of infection compared with PF. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of Constant score at 12-month follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: IF is superior to PF for the treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures.
摘要：
■本系统综述和荟萃分析的目的是评估髓内固定（IF）与钢板内固定治疗锁骨中段骨折.
■我们对电子数据库进行了计算机化搜索(PubMed，EMBASE,科克伦图书馆,Medlineand中国期刊全文数据库)从数据库建立到2022年11月底。纳入研究的质量根据Cochrane合作组织的“偏倚风险”进行评估。两组之间的比较基于8个变量，包括恒定分数，手臂的残疾，肩和手（DASH）得分，手术时间,切口长度,住院；工会时间，失血和感染。
■13项随机对照试验（RCT）共928例患者纳入我们的荟萃分析。汇总结果表明，IF可以减少手术时间和住院时间，使锁骨中段骨折受益。一个较小的切口，更好的肩部功能（DASH评分），与PF相比，愈合时间更短，感染率更低。然而,12个月随访时,两组的Constant评分无显著差异.
■IF治疗锁骨中段骨折优于PF。
■我们对电子数据库进行了计算机化搜索(PubMed，EMBASE,科克伦图书馆,Medlineand中国期刊全文数据库)从数据库建立到2022年11月底。纳入研究的质量根据Cochrane合作组织的“偏倚风险”进行评估。两组之间的比较基于8个变量，包括恒定分数，手臂的残疾，肩和手（DASH）得分，手术时间,切口长度,住院；工会时间，失血和感染。
■13项随机对照试验（RCT）共928例患者纳入我们的荟萃分析。汇总结果表明，IF可以减少手术时间和住院时间，使锁骨中段骨折受益。一个较小的切口，更好的肩部功能（DASH评分），与PF相比，愈合时间更短，感染率更低。然而,12个月随访时,两组的Constant评分无显著差异.
■IF治疗锁骨中段骨折优于PF。
