Sliding hip screw vs intramedullary nail for AO/OTA31A1-A3: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: to conduct a systematic review with consequent meta-analysis evaluating the best treatment for Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) 31A1-A3 trochanteric fractures when comparing the sliding hip screw (SHS) to the intramedullary nail (IMN). The outcomes used for comparison are major complications (in total, as well as nonunion and infection specifically), mortality rates, functional outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Search strings for the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Medline and Embase databases were developed with the help of a scientific librarian. Two authors screened the studies from the search string independently using Covidence.org and data extraction was performed similarly. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomised trials (ROB2) for RCT studies, and Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) for non-RCT studies. Meta-analyses were performed using Log Risk Ratio as the primary effect estimate. RESULTS: Of the 2,051 studies screened by the two authors, six RCTs and six non-RCTs were included in this meta-analysis, with a total of 10,402 patients. The results indicated no significant differences in total major complications, nonunion, infection or mortality between SHS and IMN treatments for AO/OTA 31A1, 31A2 and 31A3 trochanteric fractures. Due to a lack of compatible data, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis on function scores and PROM. However, there are trends that favour IMN for 31A1 and 31A2 fractures. CONCLUSION: No significant difference between SHS and IMN was found in the meta-analysis in any of the examined AO/OTA fracture subtypes in terms of primary and secondary outcomes. When assessing function scores and PROM, we found trends favouring IMN for 31A1 and 31A2 fractures that should be explored further.

Elevation of Pro-Inflammatory Cytokine Levels Following Intra-Articular Fractures-A Systematic Review.

Introduction: Intra-articular fractures are a major cause of post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). Despite adequate surgical treatment, the long-term risk for PTOA is high. Previous studies reported that joint injuries initiate an inflammatory cascade characterized by an elevation of synovial pro-inflammatory cytokines, which can lead to cartilage degradation and PTOA development. This review summarizes the literature on the post-injury regulation of pro-inflammatory cytokines and the markers of cartilage destruction in patients suffering from intra-articular fractures. Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases (1960-February 2020) and included studies that were performed on human participants, and we included control groups. Two investigators assessed the quality of the included studies using Covidence and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: Based on the surveyed literature, several synovial pro-inflammatory cytokines, including interleukins (IL)-1ß, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12p70, interferon-y, and tumor necrosis factor-α, were significantly elevated in patients suffering from intra-articular fractures compared to the control groups. A simultaneous elevation of anti-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-10 and IL-1RA was also observed. In contrast, IL-13, CTX-II, and aggrecan concentrations did not differ significantly between the compared cohorts. Conclusions: Overall, intra-articular fractures are associated with an increase in inflammation-related synovial cytokines. However, more standardized studies which focus on the ratio of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines at different time points are needed.

The ability of comorbidity indices to predict mortality in an orthopedic setting: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Several comorbidity indices have been created to estimate and adjust for the burden of comorbidity. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare the ability of different comorbidity indices to predict mortality in an orthopedic setting. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library. The search were constructed around two primary focal points: a comorbidity index and orthopedics. The last search were performed on 13 June 2019. Eligibility criteria were participants with orthopedic conditions or who underwent an orthopedic procedure, a comparison between comorbidity indices that used administrative data, and reported mortality as outcome. Two independent reviewers screened the studies using Covidence. The area under the curve (AUC) was chosen as the primary effect estimate. RESULTS: Of the 5338 studies identified, 16 met the eligibility criteria. The predictive ability of the different comorbidity indices ranged from poor (AUC < 0.70) to excellent (AUC ≥ 0.90). The majority of the included studies compared the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI) and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). In-hospital mortality was reported in eight studies reporting AUC values ranging from 0.70 to 0.92 for ECI and 0.68 to 0.89 for CCI. AUC values were generally lower for all other time points ranging from 0.67 to 0.78. For 1-year mortality the overall effect size ranging from 0.67 to 0.77 for ECI and 0.69 to 0.77 for CCI. CONCLUSION: The results of this review indicate that the ECI and CCI can equally be used to adjust for comorbidities when analyzing mortality in an orthopedic setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol for this systematic review was registered on PROSPERO, the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews on 13 June 2019 and can be accessed through record ID 133,871.

Operative versus nonoperative treatment of humeral shaft fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The humeral shaft fracture accounts for 1%-3% of all fractures and occurs in both the young and old population. However, the optimal treatment is still a matter of debate. Even though nonoperative treatment is commonly considered the gold standard, advantages have been described using operative stabilization. This systematic review aims to compare operative and nonoperative treatment in adult patients with humeral shaft fractures. METHOD: We used the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL on October 1, 2018, searching for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies. Two reviewers screened the studies using Covidence, followed by systematic data extraction. The primary outcome was defined as posttreatment complications such as nonunion, radial nerve palsy, malunion, and infections. The secondary outcomes were functional scores and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). To assess study quality, the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions and the Cochrane risk of bias tool were used. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included: 1 RCT, 1 prospective cohort, and 10 retrospective cohorts with a total of 1406 patients, of whom 835 were treated operatively and 571 nonoperatively. Mean age ranged from 35 to 64, and 54% of the patients were male. The cohort studies had, in general, moderate bias, whereas the RCT had a low bias. There were statistically significant fewer nonunions in the operative treated group with a risk ratio of 0.49 (0.35-0.67), yielding a number needed to treat = 12. There were more deep infections in the operative group with a risk ratio of 2.76 (1.01-7.53) but otherwise no statistical differences concerning malunion or nerve damage. Only 1 study included PROM data. CONCLUSION: There were fewer nonunions in the operative group but more deep infections. Because of the lack of studies reporting PROMs, the potential positive effect of operative therapy in early aftercare could not be evaluated. Therefore, PROMs should be mandatory in future comparative studies.