Operative versus nonoperative treatment for complex proximal humeral fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

Whether operative treatment for complex proximal humeral fractures has a greater benefit over nonoperative treatment is uncertain. The authors conducted a meta-analysis to include all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the advantages and disadvantages of operative vs nonoperative treatment. Multiple databases, online registries of RCTs, and proceedings from major meetings were systematically searched up to November 2012. Randomized controlled trials comparing operative and non-operative treatment for 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures were included. Two authors independently assessed methodological quality and extracted data. Seven articles with a total of 286 patients met inclusion criteria. No significant differences were found between operative and nonoperative treatment regarding Constant score, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, 15 Dimensions, and complications. Health-related quality of life according to the EuroQol-5D score in operative treatment showed statistically, but not clinically, significant improvement compared with nonoperative treatment. Operative treatment could significantly increase the incidence of additional surgery at 12- and 24-month follow-up compared with nonoperative treatment. However, sensitivity analysis showed a higher additional surgery rate at 12-month follow-up remained unstable. On the basis of current evidence, both operative and nonoperative treatment can achieve a similar treatment effect on complex proximal humeral fractures, but operative treatment may increase the occurrence of additional surgery. However, due to some limitations, the result of this meta-analysis should be cautiously interpreted, and further studies are needed.