Delayed Versus Primary Closure of Diaphyseal Forearm Fractures in Adults: Short-Term Soft Tissue Outcomes

Bi, Andrew S; Fisher, Nina; Konda, Sanjit R.; Egol, Kenneth A; Ganta, Abhishek

doi:10.1007/s43465-022-00688-3

JOIO

2022

DOI: 10.1007/s43465-022-00688-3

|View full text |Cite

Delayed Versus Primary Closure of Diaphyseal Forearm Fractures in Adults: Short-Term Soft Tissue Outcomes

Andrew S Bi

Nina Fisher

Sanjit R. Konda

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 1 publication

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Removal of Forearm Plate Leads to a Higher Risk of Refracture—A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Cao,

Zhang,

Sun

et al. 2024

Orthopaedic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivePlate fixation is the preferred method for treating forearm shaft fractures. However, it remains controversial regarding the necessity of implant removal after bone union. This review aims to assess refracture risk after plate removal.MethodsWe searched various data sources, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. A total of 6749 papers were identified, of which 23 studies were eligible for final quantitative syntheses. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were conducted to reduce heterogeneity and make the results more reliable.ResultsThe total risk difference (RD) was 0.06 (0.04–0.09), indicating that the difference was significant. In the “Reasons for Removal” subgroup analysis, the RD of the “No Symptom” subgroup was 0.07 (95% CI = 0.04–0.11), while the RD of the “Symptoms” subgroup was 0.04 (95% CI = −0.02 to 0.10). In the “Plate Type” subgroup analysis, the RD of the “LCP” subgroup was 0.07 (95% CI = 0.02–0.13), while the RD of the “DCP” subgroup was 0.07 (95% CI = 0.01–0.13). After omitting each study one by one, the RDs were all significant.ConclusionsPlate retention is significantly associated with a lower rate of refracture than plate removal. Consequently, it is not recommended to remove implants, especially for patients without implant‐related symptoms, but more reliable evidence is still needed.Trial RegistrationThe review was registered on PROSPERO and the registration ID is CRD42023424743, and a protocol was not prepared

show abstract

Removal of Forearm Plate Leads to a Higher Risk of Refracture—A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Cao,

Zhang,

Sun

et al. 2024

Orthopaedic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Delayed Versus Primary Closure of Diaphyseal Forearm Fractures in Adults: Short-Term Soft Tissue Outcomes

Cited by 1 publication

References 30 publications

Removal of Forearm Plate Leads to a Higher Risk of Refracture—A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Removal of Forearm Plate Leads to a Higher Risk of Refracture—A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About