ObjectivesTo compare re-rupture rate, complication rate, and functional outcome after operative versus nonoperative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures; to compare re-rupture rate after early and late full weight bearing; to evaluate re-rupture rate after functional rehabilitation with early range of motion; and to compare effect estimates from randomised controlled trials and observational studies.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed/Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases were last searched on 25 April 2018 for studies comparing operative versus nonoperative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures.Study selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials and observational studies reporting on comparison of operative versus nonoperative treatment of acute Achilles tendon ruptures.Data extractionData extraction was performed independently in pairs, by four reviewers, with the use of a predefined data extraction file. Outcomes were pooled using random effects models and presented as risk difference, risk ratio, or mean difference, with 95% confidence interval.Results29 studies were included—10 randomised controlled trials and 19 observational studies. The 10 trials included 944 (6%) patients, and the 19 observational studies included 14 918 (94%) patients. A significant reduction in re-ruptures was seen after operative treatment (2.3%) compared with nonoperative treatment (3.9%) (risk difference 1.6%; risk ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.60; P<0.001; I2=22%). Operative treatment resulted in a significantly higher complication rate than nonoperative treatment (4.9% v 1.6%; risk difference 3.3%; risk ratio 2.76, 1.84 to 4.13; P<0.001; I2=45%). The main difference in complication rate was attributable to the incidence of infection (2.8%) in the operative group. A similar reduction in re-rupture rate in favour of operative treatment was seen after both early and late full weight bearing. No significant difference in re-rupture rate was seen between operative and nonoperative treatment in studies that used accelerated functional rehabilitation with early range of motion (risk ratio 0.60, 0.26 to 1.37; P=0.23; I2=0%). No difference in effect estimates was seen between randomised controlled trials and observational studies.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis shows that operative treatment of Achilles tendon ruptures reduces the risk of re-rupture compared with nonoperative treatment. However, re-rupture rates are low and differences between treatment groups are small (risk difference 1.6%). Operative treatment results in a higher risk of other complications (risk difference 3.3%). The final decision on the management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures should be based on patient specific factors and shared decision making. This review emphasises the potential benefits of adding high quality observational studies in meta-analyses for the evaluation of objective outcome measures after surgical treatment.

BackgroundThe number of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures treated surgically is increasing and plate fixation is often the treatment modality of choice. The study quality and scientific levels of evidence at which possible complications of this treatment are presented vary greatly in literature.PurposesThe purpose of this systematic review is to assess the prevalence of complications concerning plate fixation of dislocated midshaft clavicle fractures.MethodsA computer-based search was carried out using EMBASE and PUBMED/MEDLINE. Studies included for review reported complications after plate fixation alone or in comparison to either treatment with intramedullary pin fixation and/or nonoperative treatment. Two quality assessment tools were used to assess the methodological quality of the studies. Included studies were ranked according to their levels of evidence.ResultsAfter study selection and reading of the full texts, 11 studies were eligible for final quality assessment. Nonunion and malunion rates were less than 10% in all analysed studies but one. The vast majority of complications seem to be implant related, with irritation or failure of the plate being consistently reported on in almost every study, on average ranging from 9 to 64%.ConclusionThe quantity of relevant high evidence studies is low. With low nonunion and malunion rates, plate fixation can be a safe treatment option for acute dislocated midshaft clavicle fractures, but complications related to the implant material requiring a second operation are frequent. Future prospective trials are needed to analyse the influence of various plate types and plate position on implant-related complications.

Background: Although the phrase "time is fascia" is well acknowledged in the case of necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs), solid evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to review the current literature concerning the timing of surgery in relation to mortality and amputation in patients with NSTIs. Methods: A systematic search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) was performed. The primary outcomes were mortality and amputation. These outcomes were related to the following time-related variables: (1) time from onset symptoms to presentation; (2) time from onset symptoms to surgery; (3) time from presentation to surgery; (4) duration of the initial surgical procedure. For the meta-analysis, the effects were estimated using random-effects meta-analysis models.Result: A total of 109 studies, with combined 6051 NSTI patients, were included. Of these 6051 NSTI patients, 1277 patients died (21.1%). A total of 33 studies, with combined 2123 NSTI patients, were included for quantitative analysis. Mortality was significantly lower for patients with surgery within 6 h after presentation compared to when treatment was delayed more than 6 h (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.26-0.70; 10 studies included). Surgical treatment within 6 h resulted in a 19% mortality rate compared to 32% when surgical treatment was delayed over 6 h. Also, surgery within 12 h reduced the mortality compared to surgery after 12 h from presentation (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.27-0.61; 16 studies included). Patient delay (time from onset of symptoms to presentation or surgery) did not significantly affect the mortality in this study. None of the time-related variables assessed significantly reduced the amputation rate. Three studies reported on the duration of the first surgery. They reported a mean operating time of 78, 81, and 102 min with associated mortality rates of 4, 11.4, and 60%, respectively.Conclusion: Average mortality rates reported remained constant (around 20%) over the past 20 years. Early surgical debridement lowers the mortality rate for NSTI with almost 50%. Thus, a sense of urgency is essential in the treatment of NSTI.

IMPORTANCENo consensus has been reached to date regarding the optimal treatment for distal radius fractures. The international rate of operative treatment has been increasing, despite higher costs and limited functional outcome evidence to support this shift. OBJECTIVESTo compare functional, clinical, and radiologic outcomes after operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures in adults. DATA SOURCES The PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases were searched from inception to June 15, 2019, for studies comparing operative vs nonoperative treatment of distal radius fractures. STUDY SELECTION Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting on the following: acute distal radius fracture with operative treatment (internal or external fixation) vs nonoperative treatment (cast immobilization, splinting, or bracing); patients 18 years or older; and functional outcome. Studies in a language other than English or reporting treatment for refracture were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS Data extraction was performed independently by 2 reviewers. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effects models and presented as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Data were analyzed in September 2019. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome measures included medium-term functional outcome measured with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) and the overall complication rate after operative and nonoperative treatment.RESULTS A total of 23 unique studies were included, consisting of 8 RCTs and 15 observational studies, that described 2254 unique patients. Among the studies that presented sex data, 1769 patients were women [80.6%]. Overall weighted mean age was 67 [range, 22-90] years). The RCTs included 656 patients (29.1%); observational studies, 1598 patients (70.9%). The overall pooled effect estimates the showed a significant improvement in medium-term (Յ1 year) DASH score after operative treatment compared with nonoperative treatment (MD,]; P = .005; I 2 = 84%). No difference in complication rate was observed (RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69-1.55]; P = .87; I 2 = 62%). A significant improvement in grip strength was noted after operative treatment, measured in kilograms (MD, 2.73 [95% CI,]; P = .04; I 2 = 79%) and as a percentage of the unaffected side (MD, 8.21 [95% CI,]; P = .007; I 2 = 76%). No improvement in mediumterm DASH score was found in the subgroup of studies that only included patients 60 years or older (MD, −0.98 [95% CI, −3.52 to 1.57]; P = .45; I 2 = 34%]), compared with a larger improvement in (continued)

Purpose The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to present current evidence on rib fixation and to compare effect estimates obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Methods MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL were searched on June 16th 2017 for both RCTs and observational studies comparing rib fixation versus nonoperative treatment. The MINORS criteria were used to assess study quality. Where possible, data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis. The primary outcome measure was mortality. Secondary outcome measures were hospital length of stay (HLOS), intensive care unit length of stay (ILOS), duration of mechanical ventilation (DMV), pneumonia, and tracheostomy. Results Thirty-three studies were included resulting in 5874 patients with flail chest or multiple rib fractures: 1255 received rib fixation and 4619 nonoperative treatment. Rib fixation for flail chest reduced mortality compared to nonoperative treatment with a risk ratio of 0.41 (95% CI 0.27, 0.61, p < 0.001, I 2 = 0%). Furthermore, rib fixation resulted in a shorter ILOS, DMV, lower pneumonia rate, and need for tracheostomy. Results from recent studies showed lower mortality and shorter DMV after rib fixation, but there were no significant differences for the other outcome measures. There was insufficient data to perform meta-analyses on rib fixation for multiple rib fractures. Pooled results from RCTs and observational studies were similar for all outcome measures, although results from RCTs showed a larger treatment effect for HLOS, ILOS, and DMV compared to observational studies. Conclusions Rib fixation for flail chest improves short-term outcome, although the indication and patient subgroup who would benefit most remain unclear. There is insufficient data regarding treatment for multiple rib fractures. Observational studies show similar results compared with RCTs. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00068-018-1020-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.