Both-bone forearm fractures in children Intramedullary nailing or open reduction with plate fixation?

Abstract

Six small retrospective cohort studies shed little light on whether intramedullary nailing (IMN) or open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with plate fixation is more effective in treating both-bone forearm fractures in children. No statistically significant difference between treatment groups was found with regard to functional outcomes or the average magnitude of radial bowing.Small sample sizes may have precluded detection of statistically significant differences. In one study, a statistically significant difference was found in the average radial bow location in the IMN group as compared with both the ORIF group and normative values. Cosmetically,IMN provided significantly better results (ie, smaller incision/scar length) than ORIF as assessed by two studies. For both nonunion/delayed healing and complications, rates varied widely between studies and did not consistently favor one treatment method over the other. Randomized controlled studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to determine which treatment option is optimal. Use of validated outcomes measures is recommended. 根据6项小样本回顾性队列研究的结果,在评价髓内钉固定(IMN)和切开复位钢板内固定(ORIF)治疗儿童前臂双骨折的疗效时证据较弱.研究结果显示,在患肢功能和桡骨弓的恢复方面,两种治疗方法差异无统计学意义.由于样本量较小,本身就排除了产生统计学差异的可能性.一项研究显示,IMN组桡骨弓的顶点位置与ORIF组相比差异均有统计学意义.2项研究认为,与ORIF组相比,IMN组术后结果更好(如手术切口、瘢痕更小).在骨折不愈合或延迟愈合和并发症发生率方面,各研究结论不一,无法说明哪种方法更优.综上所述,仍需大样本的随机对照研究并进行长期随访,采用有效的评价方法,以便更好地评价哪种治疗方法更好.……