Dataset Information

Internal fixation versus nonoperative treatment for displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

A few studies focused on open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or nonoperative treatment of displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients have been published, all of whom had a low number of patients. In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we aimed to assess the effect of ORIF or nonoperative treatment of displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients on the clinical outcomes and re-evaluate of the potential benefits of conservative treatment.

Methods

We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for randomized controlled trials comparing ORIF and nonoperative treatment of displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. Our outcome measures were the Constant scores.

Results

Three randomized controlled trials with a total of 130 patients were identified and analyzed. The overall results based on fixed-effect model did not support the treatment of open reduction and internal fixation to improve the functional outcome when compared with nonoperative treatment for treating elderly patients with displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures (WMD -0.51, 95% CI: -7.25 to 6.22, P = 0.88, I(2) = 0%).

Conclusions

Although our meta-analysis did not support the treatment of open reduction and internal fixation to improve the functional outcome when compared with nonoperative treatment for treating elderly patients with displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures, this result must be considered in the context of variable patient demographics. Only a limited recommendation can be made based on current data. Considering the limitations of included studies, a large, well designed trial that incorporates the evaluation of clinically relevant outcomes in participants with different underlying risks of shoulder function is required to more adequately assess the role for ORIF or nonoperative treatment.

SUBMITTER: Li Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3774627 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Internal fixation versus nonoperative treatment for displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Li Yongchuan Y Zhao Liangyu L Zhu Lei L Li Jing J Chen Aimin A

PloS one 20130916 9

<h4>Background</h4>A few studies focused on open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or nonoperative treatment of displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients have been published, all of whom had a low number of patients. In this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we aimed to assess the effect of ORIF or nonoperative treatment of displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients on the clinical outcomes and re-evaluate of ...[more]

PMID: 24066182

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlmost one-third of patients with proximal humeral fractures are treated surgically, and the number is increasing. When surgical treatment is chosen, there is sparse evidence on the optimum method. The DelPhi (Delta prosthesis-PHILOS plate) trial is a clinical trial comparing 2 surgical treatments. Our hypothesis was that reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) yields better clinical results compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using an angular stable plate.MethodsThe DelPhi trial is a randomized controlled trial comparing reverse TSA with ORIF for displaced proximal humeral fractures (OTA/AO types 11-B2 and 11-C2) in elderly patients (65 to 85 years of age). The primary outcome measure was the Constant score at a 2-year follow-up. The secondary outcome measures included the Oxford Shoulder Score and radiographic evaluation. Results were reported as the mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI). The intention-to-treat principle was applied for crossover patients.ResultsThere were 124 patients included in the study. At 2 years, the mean Constant score was 68.0 points (95% CI, 63.7 to 72.4 points) for the reverse TSA group compared with 54.6 points (95% CI, 48.5 to 60.7 points) for the ORIF group, resulting in a significant mean difference of 13.4 points (95% CI, 6.2 to 20.6 points; p < 0.001) in favor of reverse TSA. When stratified for fracture classification, the mean score was 69.3 points (95% CI, 63.9 to 74.7 points) for the reverse TSA group and 50.6 points (95% CI, 41.9 to 59.2 points) for the ORIF group for type-C2 fractures, which yielded a significant mean difference of 18.7 points (95% CI, 9.3 to 28.2 points; p < 0.001). In the type-B2 fracture group, the mean score was 66.2 points (95% CI, 58.6 to 73.8 points) for the reverse TSA group and 58.5 points (95% CI, 49.6 to 67.4 points) for the ORIF group, resulting in a nonsignificant mean difference of 7.6 points (95% CI, -3.8 to 19.1 points; p = 0.19).ConclusionsAt a 2-year follow-up, the data suggested an advantage of reverse TSA over ORIF in the treatment of displaced OTA/AO type-B2 and C2 proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are 2 mainstream treatments for displaced femoral neck fracture, including internal fixation and arthroplasty. However, there are still some controversial problems as to which treatment should be primarily chosen.MethodsThe relevant studies comparing arthroplasty with internal fixation were searched in the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Finally, 31 relevant randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. The quality of studies was evaluated and meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. We also assessed the heterogeneity among studies and publication bias via the I-squared index and forest plots.ResultsThere was no significant difference between arthroplasty and internal fixation groups in patient mortality at both short-term and long-term points. However, patients treated with arthroplasty showed significantly lowered risks of reoperation both at short-term (5.6% vs 31.5%; relative risks (RR) = 0.19; 95% CI, 0.13-0.28; P < .00001) and long-term follow-up (9.5% vs 45.9%; RR = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.17-0.33; P < .00001). Similarly, arthroplasty-treated patients demonstrated a significant decrease in the risk of postoperation complications at short-term (10.3% vs 34.4%; RR = 0.37, 95% CI, 0.24-0.57; P < .00001) and long-term follow-up (11.7% vs 42.5%; RR = 0.30, 95% CI, 0.16-0.57; P < .0002). Besides, patients in the arthroplasty group were associated with better alleviation of pain postoperation (18.3% vs 31.1%; RR = 0.50, 95% CI, 0.33-0.78; P = .002).In trial sequence analyses, all cumulative Z curves except that of mortality crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundaries and conventional boundaries, and required information size has been reached.ConclusionsArthroplasty leads to a lower rate of reoperation, a reduced risk of complications, and a better alleviation of postoperation pain both at short-term and long-term follow-up. Most importantly, and according to trial sequence analyses, more than enough evidence has been achieved that arthroplasty does show better outcomes than internal fixation in terms of reoperation rate, complications, and postoperation pain.Level of evidenceTherapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Dataset Information

Internal fixation versus nonoperative treatment for displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Internal fixation versus nonoperative treatment for displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets