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.

Impact of COVID-19 on orthopaedic care: a call for nonoperative management.

BACKGROUND: Surgical specialties face unique challenges caused by SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19). These disruptions will call on clinicians to have greater consideration for non-operative treatment options to help manage patient symptoms and provide therapeutic care in lieu of the traditional surgical management course of action. This study aimed to summarize the current guidance on elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, assess how this guidance may impact orthopaedic care, and review any recommendations for non-operative management in light of elective surgery disruptions. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted, and included guidance were categorized as either "Selective Postponement" or "Complete Postponement" of elective surgery. Selective postponement was considered as guidance that suggested elective cases should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, whereas complete postponement suggested that all elective procedures be postponed until after the pandemic, with no case-by-case consideration. In addition, any statements regarding conservative/non-operative management were summarized when provided by included reports. RESULTS: A total of 11 reports from nine different health organizations were included in this review. There were seven (63.6%) guidance reports that suggested a complete postponement of non-elective surgical procedures, whereas four (36.4%) reports suggested the use of selective postponement of these procedures. The guidance trends shifted from selective to complete elective surgery postponement occurred throughout the month of March. The general guidance provided by these reports was to have an increased consideration for non-operative treatment options whenever possible and safe. As elective surgery begins to re-open, non-operative management will play a key role in managing the surgical backlog caused by the elective surgery shutdown. CONCLUSION: Global guidance from major medical associations are in agreement that elective surgical procedures require postponement in order to minimize the risk of COVID-19 spread, as well as increase available hospital resources for managing the influx of COVID-19 patients. It is imperative that clinicians and patients consider non-operative, conservative treatment options in order to manage conditions and symptoms until surgical management options become available again, and to manage the increased surgical waitlists caused by the elective surgery shutdowns.