Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 1 of 1
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 99-B, Issue SUPP_8 | Pages 56 - 56
1 Apr 2017
Gouk C Rebgetz P Thomas M
Full Access

Background

Distal radius fractures are among the most common fractures encountered in the clinical setting, with a reported incidence of 17%. Of these common fractures, it has been said 60% are intra-articular in nature. Intra-articular or unstable and comminuted fractures represent severe, high energy injuries. There is a considerable amount of controversy as to which fixation method is superior. Even the OA concludes; “comparing external fixation (EF) with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for the treatment of intra-articular distal radius fractures described no consistent benefit of one treatment over another”. There are only a few randomised control trials that go beyond one year to cover the long-term follow up (over two years). There has yet to be a meta-analysis of the long-term outcomes of open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) versus external fixation. We aim to show from this meta-analysis if there is any significant difference in the outcomes of either fixation method in the long-term.

Method

We pooled the data of all available randomised control trials that compare the long-term outcomes of ORIF against external fixation of distal radius fractures. We completed a systematic review of PubMed, embase, MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library, from inception to December 2014. We then preformed our meta-analysis using RevMan 5.3 software.