scholarly journals Comparison between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and open reduction–internal fixation for proximal humeral fractures: a meta-analysis based on 1050 individuals

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feilong Li ◽  
Tao Nie ◽  
Xuqiang Liu ◽  
Fuqiang Wang ◽  
Zhiping Gu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Nerve Injury ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Open Reduction Internal Fixation ◽  
Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Fracture Union

Abstract Background This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and open reduction–internal fixation (ORIF) in patients with proximal humeral fractures. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify all relevant studies from inception to April 2019. Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manage 5.3 was used for meta-analysis. Results Sixteen studies involving 1050 patients (464 patients in the MIPO group and 586 patients in the ORIF group) were finally included. According to the meta-analysis, MIPO was superior to ORIF in operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, fracture union time, and constant score. However, MIPO was associated with more exposure to radiation and axillary nerve injury. No significant differences were found in length of hospital stays and complication except for axillary nerve injury. Conclusion The present evidence indicates that compared to ORIF, MIPO had advantages in functional outcomes, operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, and fracture union time for the treatment of PHFs. However, the MIPO technique had a higher rate of axillary nerve injury and longer radiation time compared to ORIF.

scholarly journals Comparison between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and open reduction–internal fixation for proximal humeral fractures: a meta-analysis based on 1050 individuals

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feilong Li ◽  
Tao Nie ◽  
Xuqiang Liu ◽  
Fuqiang Wang ◽  
Zhiping Gu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Nerve Injury ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Open Reduction Internal Fixation ◽  
Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Fracture Union

Abstract Background This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and open reduction–internal fixation (ORIF) in patients with proximal humeral fractures. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify all relevant studies from inception to April 2019. Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manage 5.3 was used for meta-analysis. Results Sixteen studies involving 1050 patients (464 patients in the MIPO group and 586 patients in the ORIF group) were finally included. According to the meta-analysis, MIPO was superior to ORIF in operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, fracture union time, and constant score. However, MIPO was associated with more exposure to radiation and axillary nerve injury. No significant differences were found in length of hospital stays and complication except for axillary nerve injury. Conclusion The present evidence indicates that compared to ORIF, MIPO had advantages in functional outcomes, operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, and fracture union time for the treatment of PHFs. However, the MIPO technique had a higher rate of axillary nerve injury and longer radiation time compared to ORIF.

scholarly journals Comparison between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and open reduction-internal fixation for proximal humeral fractures: a meta-analysis based on 1050 individuals

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Feilong Li ◽  
Xuqiang Liu ◽  
Fuqiang Wang ◽  
Zhiping Gu ◽  
Qianyuan Tao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Nerve Injury ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Open Reduction Internal Fixation ◽  
Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Fracture Union

Abstract Background This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and open reduction–internal fixation (ORIF) in patients with proximal humeral fractures. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify all relevant studies from inception to April 2019. Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manage 5.3 was used for meta-analysis. Results Sixteen studies involving 1050 patients (464 patients in the MIPO group and 586 patients in the ORIF group) were finally included. According to the meta-analysis, MIPO was superior to ORIF in operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, fracture union time, and constant score. However, MIPO was associated with more exposure to radiation and axillary nerve injury. No significant differences were found in length of hospital stays and complication except for axillary nerve injury. Conclusion The present evidence indicates that compared to ORIF, MIPO had advantages in functional outcomes, operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, and fracture union time for the treatment of PHFs. However, the MIPO technique had a higher rate of axillary nerve injury and longer radiation time compared to ORIF.

scholarly journals Comparison between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and open reduction–internal fixation for proximal humeral fractures: a meta-analysis based on 1050 individuals

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Feilong Li ◽  
Tao Nie ◽  
Xuqiang Liu ◽  
Fuqiang Wang ◽  
Zhiping Gu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Internal Fixation ◽  
Nerve Injury ◽  
Open Reduction ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Axillary Nerve ◽  
Open Reduction Internal Fixation ◽  
Humeral Fractures ◽  
Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis

Abstract Background This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and open reduction–internal fixation (ORIF) in patients with proximal humeral fractures. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify all relevant studies from inception to April 2019. Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manage 5.3 was used for meta-analysis. Results Sixteen studies involving 1050 patients (464 patients in the MIPO group and 586 patients in the ORIF group) were finally included. According to the meta-analysis, MIPO was superior to ORIF in operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, fracture union time, and constant score. However, MIPO was associated with more exposure to radiation and axillary nerve injury. No significant differences were found in length of hospital stays and complication except for axillary nerve injury. Conclusion The present evidence indicates that MIPO offers superior outcomes in comparison to ORIF. However, surgeons should pay attention to reducing radiation exposure and avoiding axillary nerve injury.

scholarly journals Comparison between Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis and Conventional Open Plating for Midshaft Clavicle Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enzhe Zhao ◽  
Rui Zhang ◽  
Dou Wu ◽  
Yao Guo ◽  
Qiang Liu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Cohort Studies ◽  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Clavicle Fractures

Objective. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome and complications in midshaft clavicle fractures receiving minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and conventional open plating. Methods. Relevant studies were searched in the databases of Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science from inception to March 1, 2019. Pooled data were analyzed with Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager 5.3. Results. A total of 7 studies were included, of which 2 were randomized controlled trials, 3 were retrospective cohort studies, and 2 were prospective cohort studies including 316 patients. No statistical differences in functional outcome (weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.99, P=0.12), operation time (WMD = −10.44, P=0.07) and time to bone union (WMD = −0.23, P=0.70) were observed between the two groups. However, minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis reduced rates of skin numbness (odds ratio (OR) = 0.25, 95% CI : 0.13 to 0.48; P<0.0001) and complications (OR = 0.33, 95% CI : 0.16 to 0.71; P=0.005) compared with conventional open plating. Conclusion. This systematic review and meta-analysis found no differences in terms of functional outcomes, operation time, and fracture healing time between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and conventional open plating. However, minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis had apparent advantages in rates of skin numbness and complications.

scholarly journals Posterolateral Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110164
Author(s):  
Elsayed Said ◽  
Mohamed E. Abdel-Wanis ◽  
Mohamed Ameen ◽  
Ali A. Sayed ◽  
Khaled H. Mosallam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: Arthrodesis has been a valid treatment option for spinal diseases, including spondylolisthesis and lumbar spinal stenosis. Posterolateral and posterior lumbar interbody fusion are amongst the most used fusion techniques. Previous reports comparing both methods have been contradictory. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to establish substantial evidence on which fusion method would achieve better outcomes. Methods: Major databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL were searched to identify studies comparing outcomes of interest between posterolateral fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). We extracted data on clinical outcome, complication rate, revision rate, fusion rate, operation time, and blood loss. We calculated the mean differences (MDs) for continuous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each outcome and the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: We retrieved 8 studies meeting our inclusion criteria, with a total of 616 patients (308 PLF, 308 PLIF). The results of our analysis revealed that patients who underwent PLIF had significantly higher fusion rates. No statistically significant difference was identified in terms of clinical outcomes, complication rates, revision rates, operation time or blood loss. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a comparison between PLF and PLIF based on RCTs. Although PLIF had higher fusion rates, both fusion methods achieve similar clinical outcomes with equal complication rate, revision rate, operation time and blood loss at 1-year minimum follow-up.

scholarly journals Comparison of Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Plate Osteosynthesis and Open Reduction Internal Fixation on Proximal Humeral Fracture in Elder Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Zhao ◽  
Yuhui Zhang ◽  
Dongni Johansson ◽  
Xingyu Chen ◽  
Fang Zheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Internal Fixation ◽  
Open Reduction ◽  
Proximal Humeral Fracture ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Humeral Fracture ◽  
Open Reduction Internal Fixation ◽  
Elder Patients

Objective. The study aims to compare minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) in the treatment of proximal humeral fracture in elder patients. Method. PubMed, Medline, EMbase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wangfang, and VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals were searched to identify all relevant studies from inception to October 2016. Data were analyzed with Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manage 5.2. Results. A total of 630 patients from 8 publications were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that MIPO was superior to ORIF in the treatment of proximal humeral fracture in elder patients. It was reflected in reducing blood loss, operation time, postoperative pain, or fracture healing time of the surgery and in improving recovery of muscle strength. Concerning complications, no significant difference was seen between MIPO and ORIF. Conclusion. The MIPO was more suitable than ORIF for treating proximal humeral fracture in elder patients.

scholarly journals Comparison of Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Laparoendoscopic Single-site Donor Nephrectomy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chung-Yu Lin ◽  
Ching-Chia Li ◽  
Hung-Lung Ke ◽  
Wen-Jeng Wu ◽  
Yii-Her Chou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Warm Ischemia ◽  
Donor Nephrectomy ◽  
Warm Ischemia Time ◽  
Single Site ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Ischemia Time ◽  
Laparoendoscopic Single Site

Abstract Background: Laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy is the standard technique at high-volume renal transplant centers. Laparoendoscopic single-site donor nephrectomy (LESS-DN) is a relatively novel minimally invasive surgery, which was differed to transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches. We present a retrospective analysis of our single-institution donor nephrectomy series comparing the transperitoneal to retroperitoneal LESS-DN with regards to operative outcomes.Materials and Methods: Ten patients who underwent LESS-DN from 2017–2019 were enrolled at our center. The same surgeon performed all cases. The two approaches were compared retrospectively and evaluated for differences in perioperative outcomes, including operation time, console time, blood loss, graft warm ischemia time, postoperative pain, length of stay (LOS), wound size, postoperative pain, and renal function post LESS-DN at less than one year.Results: Total operating time (315 ± 82.69 vs. 191 ± 24.9 min, p = 0.016), console time (224 ± 74.15 vs. 110 ± 19.84 min, p = 0.016), and LOS (8.4 ± 1.82 vs. 4.8 ± 1.10 days, p = 0.013) were significantly longer in the transperitoneal group. The wound size (44 ± 3.81 vs. 68.2 ± 13.5 mm, p = 0.038) was significantly smaller in the transperitoneal group. There was no significant difference in other parameters, including blood loss, warm ischemia time, and postoperative pain from day one to day three.Conclusions: Retroperitoneal LESS-DN results in similar perioperative outcomes as transperitoneal LESS-DN without compromising donor safety, and while providing a faster operation time, console time, shorter LOS, and a trend toward a shorter warm ischemia time.

scholarly journals Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis in Humeral Shaft Fractures via Anterior Approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (13) ◽  
pp. 745-750
Author(s):  
Nikhilkumar Sureshkumar Oza ◽  
Ganesh A ◽  
Anand Kumar Singh ◽  
Pulin Bihari Das ◽  
Anurag Singh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Radial Nerve ◽  
Anterior Approach ◽  
Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis ◽  
Fracture Union ◽  
Excellent Outcome ◽  
Radial Nerve Injury

BACKGROUND This case series was conducted to evaluate the intraoperative and post-operative outcomes of fracture shaft of humerus managed by indirect reduction and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) via anterior approach. METHODS In this case series 26 diaphyseal fractures of the humerus treated with MIPO, between June 2017 and February 2020 at a tertiary care hospital were included. All the patients were followed up for a minimum period of 2 years postoperatively. The objective was to evaluate these cases clinically for shoulder and elbow range of motion and document any complications. Other parameters such as duration of surgery and radiological time for fracture union were also documented. RESULTS The mean duration for surgery was 86.5 minutes. The University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder scoring system rated 18 patients (69.2 %) as excellent outcome, 07 patients (26.9 %) as good outcome, and 1 patient (3.8 %) as fair outcome. The MAYO Elbow Performance Scoring system rated 20 patients (76.9 %) as excellent outcome and 06 patients (23.1 %) as good outcome. About 96 % of patients achieved fracture union by the end of 16 weeks post-operatively (mean 13.4 weeks). No complications related to infection, iatrogenic radial nerve injury or implant failure were noted in the study. 4 cases had varus angulation deformity but did not affect shoulder or elbow function. CONCLUSIONS MIPO is a safe and effective technique for the management of diaphyseal humerus fractures, with early fracture healing, less risk of complications such as infection and iatrogenic radial nerve injury, along with a cosmetically acceptable scar. KEYWORDS Fracture Fixation, Fracture Healing, Humeral Fractures, Radial Nerve, Shoulder

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document