闭合复位外固定与切开复位内固定治疗桡骨远端骨折的Meta分析  

Meta- Analysis on Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures with Closed Reduction and External Fixation or Open Reduction and Internal Fixation

作　　者：杜亮[1] 陈柯屹[2] 胡五星[1] 王正[1] 伍婷婷 胡晓梅[1] 

机构地区：[1]成都中医药大学,四川成都610075 [2]四川省骨科医院,四川成都610041 [3]四川省南充东方医院,四川南充637000

出　　处：《黑龙江医学》2015年第11期1213-1216,共4页Heilongjiang Medical Journal

摘　　要：目的对闭合复位外固定和切开复位内固定治疗桡骨远端骨折疗效进行Meta分析。方法计算机检索Pub Med、Cochrane图书馆、EMBase、Wan Fang data(万方数据库)、CNKI(中国学术期刊全文数据库)等,收集闭合复位外固定和切开复位内固定治疗桡骨远端骨折随机对照试验(RCT)相关文献,检索时间均从建库至2015年3月,并用Rev Man 5.2软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入12篇文献,患者共887例,外固定组444例,内固定组443例。Meta分析结果:切开复位内固定组在DASH评分、总的并发症发生率、感染率及尺骨变异方面优于闭合复位外固定组;在患者握力方面二者无明显差异。结论结合疗效及并发症方面考虑,切开复位内固定治疗桡骨远端骨折优于闭合复位外固定,但受纳入文献研究质量的限制和可能存在偏倚,上述结论尚需更多大样本、高质量随机对照试验加以验证。Objective To analyze the curative effect and complications of closed reduction and external fixation （CREF）and open re- duction and internal fixation （ORIF） for distal radius fracture. Methods Using computer searched PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBase, WanFang database and CNKI, collected randomized controlled trials for unstable distal radius fracture, retrieval time was based on from building time to February 2015. The Meta - analysis was performed with RevMan 5.2 Software. Results 12 RCTs involving 887 patients were included of which 444 were in CREF group, and another 443 for ORIF group. Meta analysis showed ： ORIF group in the DASH score, complications rates, infection rates and unlar variation areas were better than CREF group. There were no differences between the two groups in grip strength of the contralateral percentage. Conclusion combined with the clinical effect and complications rates, ORIF for distal radius fracture was better than CREF. But restricted by the quality of literature research and possible bias, the conclusion still needed more large sample and high quality randomized controlled trials to validate.

关 键 词：桡骨远端骨折 闭合复位外固定 切开复位内固定 随机对照试验 META分析 

分 类 号：R681.7[医药卫生—骨科学]