Reamed versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of femoral fractures: A meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials. Issue 29 (July 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Li, A-Bing; Zhang, Wei-Jiang; Guo, Wei-Jun; Wang, Xin-Hua; Jin, Hai-Ming; Zhao, You-Ming
• Other Names: Mayr. Johannes section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 95:Issue 29(2016)
• Publication Date: 2016-07
• Subjects: femoral shaft fracture -- meta-analysis -- randomized controlled trials -- reamed intramedullary nailing -- unreamed intramedullary nailing; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000004248
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract: Background and objective: Intramedullary nailing is commonly used for treating femoral shaft fractures, one of the most common long bone fractures in adults. The reamed intramedullary nail is considered the standard implant for femoral fractures. This meta-analysis was performed to verify the superiority of reamed intramedullary nailing over unreamed intramedullary nailing in fractures of the femoral shaft in adults. Subgroup analysis of implant failure and secondary procedure was also performed. Methods: Electronic literature databases were used to identify relevant publications and included MEDLINE (Ovid interface), EMBASE (Ovid interface), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; Wiley Online Library). The versions available on January 30, 2016, were utilized. Only human studies, which were designed as randomized controlled clinical trials, were included. Two authors independently evaluated the quality of original research publications and extracted data from the studies that met the criteria. Results: Around 8 randomized controlled trials involving 1078 patients were included. Reamed intramedullary nailing was associated with shorter time to consolidation of the fracture (SMD = –0.62, 95% CI = –0.89 to –0.35, P < 0.00001), lower secondary procedure rate (OR = 0.25, 95% CI 0.10–0.62, P = 0.003), lower nonunion rate (OR = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.05–0.40, P < 0.01), and lower delayed-union rate (OR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.07–0.49, P < 0.01) compared to unreamed intramedullary nailing. The 2 groups showed no significant differences in risk of implant failure (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.14–1.74, P = 0.27), mortality risk (OR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.19–4.68, P = 0.94), risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS; OR = 1.55, 95% CI 0.36–6.57, P = 0.55), or blood loss (SMD = 0.57, 95% CI = –0.22 to 1.36, P = 0.15). Conclusion: Reamed intramedullary nailing is correlated with shorter time to union and lower rates of delayed-union, nonunion, and reoperation. Reamed intramedullary nailing did not increase blood loss or the rates of ARDS, implant failure, and mortality compared to unreamed intramedullary nailing. Therefore, the treatment of femoral fractures using reamed intramedullary nailing is recommended.