Management of Severely Displaced Radial Neck Fractures in Children: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outcomes

Background This systematic review is an attempt to provide an evidence-based analysis of literature on management of severely displaced radial neck fractures (with > 60° displacement) in children. Material and Methods A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all original articles...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inIndian journal of orthopaedics Vol. 54; no. 1; pp. 60 - 68
Main Authors Narang, Ashish M., Pandey, Anuja A., Bhat, Murlidhar
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New Delhi Springer India 01.02.2020
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background This systematic review is an attempt to provide an evidence-based analysis of literature on management of severely displaced radial neck fractures (with > 60° displacement) in children. Material and Methods A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all original articles published between 01/01/1999 and 20/01/17 on surgical treatment of radial neck fractures in children in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL PLUS. Studies reporting pre-operative fracture displacement and post-operative outcomes according to standard outcome measures were included. Results Out of 887 studies identified on initial search, 48 were eligible for full-text review and 14 studies with a total of 173 patients were included in the final review. The overall success rate after severely displaced radial neck fractures in skeletally immature patients was 87% (95% CI, 82%, 92%). Closed reduction methods reported higher success rate of 90% (95% CI, 85%, 95%) compared to open reduction methods 77% (95% CI, 63%, 89%). Conclusion The average rate of patients achieving excellent/good outcomes following surgical management after severely displaced radial neck fractures in this review is better than reports from previous reviews. Considering the limitations in current evidence base including lack of direct comparison of techniques and small study samples, large comparative studies controlling for possible confounders are merited.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
ISSN:0019-5413
1998-3727
DOI:10.1007/s43465-019-00032-2