Background: Supracondylar fractures are one of the most frequent pediatric bone fractures. There are well-known treatments for this fracture. The most commonly used procedure is closed percutaneous reduction pinning, and open reduction internal fixation is for irreducible fractures. This study aims to evaluate and review those two procedures in treating a supracondylar humeral fracture in children by evaluating the clinical and functional outcomes.Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) were conducted. Using Boolean operators, literature was searched through PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Cochrane Library. The outcomes assessed by Flynn's criteria include functional aspects, cosmetic factors, and other outcomes.Results: From 130 studies obtained, after a full-text review, four studies were included in the systematic review. The total sample size was around 268 patients with a mean age of 4-14. Male patients were higher than females. There is no significant difference in satisfactory outcomes measured by Flynn’s Criteria.Discussion: Flynn's criteria was found to be different in the result of the studies. Insignificant loss of carrying degree and Baumann's angle between two procedures. Some complications, like nerve injury, infection, and scar, were also seen after surgery.Conclusion: The two approaches have an insignificant difference in their functional outcome. The choice of which procedure to perform relies on the surgeon’s preference and the situation of the fractures.

Introduction: Meniscal tears is one of the most common injury in knee. The surgical management of meniscal tears has seen an increasing trend towards meniscal repair from partial meniscectomy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and review the comparison of the results between arthroscopic partial menisectomy with meniscal repair on meniscal tears by evaluating clinical outcomes and radiological outcomes. Method: Systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Literature was searched through PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct and Cochrane Library using Boolean operators. The outcomes assessed by Lysholm, Tegner IKDC, KOOS score and osteoarthritis radiological outcomes. Results: Six studies included in the systematic review. Five are retrospective cohort studies and one is prospective cohort study. Total sample size were around 527 patients, with 308 patients undergoing APM procedure and the rest 219 patients had meniscal repair. Discussion: Most studies showed meniscal repair had better outcomes compared to APM with significant difference in almost all outcomes measurement. Only one study reported APM better than meniscal tear in KOOS score. Conclusion: There are significant difference between APM and meniscal repair in the patients reported outcome and also in the OA radiologic outcomes. There is only one study that showed APM have better clinical outcomes compared with meniscal repair. The choice of which procedure to perform relies on the surgeon’s preference and the patient condition.