TRAUMA
Prognostic factors for predicting outcomes after intramedullary nailing of the tibia
Este estudio ha sido identificado como potencialmente de alto impacto.
La métrica de alto impacto de OE, impulsada por la IA, estima la influencia que probablemente tendrá un artículo integrando señales tanto de la revista en la que se publica como del contenido científico del propio artículo.
Desarrollado mediante el procesamiento del lenguaje natural más avanzado, el modelo de Alto Impacto de OE predice con mayor precisión el futuro rendimiento de las citas de un estudio que el factor de impacto de la revista por sí solo.
Esto permite reconocer antes las investigaciones clínicamente significativas y ayuda a los lectores a centrarse en los artículos con más probabilidades de configurar la práctica futura.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(6):117 J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Oct 3;94(19):1786-93. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01418.1226 patients who were included in the Study to Prospectively Evaluate Reamed Intramedullary Nails in Patients with Tibial Fractures (SPRINT) and completed the 1 year follow-up were included in this study to identify prognostic factors for predicting negative outcomes of this treatment. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified an increased risk of a negative event for high energy fractures, stainless steel nails vs titanium nails, fracture gaps, full postoperative weight bearing, and open fractures treated with reamed nailing from the 15 baseline and surgical factors investigated.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Sí = 1
Incierto = 0,5
No relevante = 0
No = 0
La evaluación de los criterios de información evalúa la transparencia con la que los autores informan de las características metodológicas y del ensayo dentro de la publicación. La evaluación se divide en cinco categorías que se presentan a continuación.
3/4
Randomization
4/4
Outcome Measurements
4/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
4/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
El Índice de Fragilidad es una herramienta que ayuda en la interpretación de hallazgos significativos, proporcionando una medida de fuerza para un resultado. El Índice de Fragilidad representa el número de eventos consecutivos que es necesario añadir a un resultado dicotómico para que el hallazgo deje de ser significativo. Un número pequeño representa un hallazgo más débil y un número grande un hallazgo más fuerte.
¿Por qué se necesitaba ahora este estudio?
The surgical fixation of tibial shaft fractures using intramedullary nail has become common practice, however, the choice between reamed and unreamed intramedullary nails has remained controversial. A recent study (SPRINT) investigated the outcomes of the use of reamed and unreamed intramedullary nails in the treatment tibial shaft fractures. Further assessments of baseline and surgical factors that may influence the risk of negative outcomes were needed to facilitate optimal patient care and guide treatment practices.
¿Cuál era la pregunta principal de la investigación?
Are there prognostic baseline or surgical factors associated with the risk of negative outcomes at 1 year following reamed or unreamed intramedullary nailing of open/ closed tibial shaft fractures?
¿Cuáles fueron los hallazgos importantes?
- 1226 patients completed the one year follow-up and were used in the prognostic assessment. 622 patients were treated with reamed intramedullary nails and 604 patients were treated with unreamed intramedullary nails.
- There was an increased risk of negative outcomes in high-energy injuries compared to low energy injuries (OR=1.57 95CI, 1.05 to 2.35) (p=0.03), A similar increase in risk with evident with the use of stainless steel nails compared to titanium (OR-1.52 95CI 1.10 to 2.13) (p<0.01).
- A fracture gap of <1 cm compared to no fracture gap was also associated with a greater risk of negative outcomes (OR= 2.4 95CI, 1.47 to 3.94) (p<0.001), and finally full postoperative weight bearing compared to partial postoperative weight bearing was also associated with a greater risk of negative outcomes (OR=1.63 95CI 1.00 to 2.64) (p<0.048)
- The increased risk associated with full postoperative weight bearing and nail material was attributed to the autodynamization component of the composite score for negative outcomes. Autodynamization rate was 12.8 percent for full weight bearing versus 3.9 percent for partial/non-weight bearing. Autodynamization rate was 2.3 percent with titanium and 10.1 percent with stainless steel.
- Open fracture increased the risk of a negative outcome only for patients who had reamed nailing (OR=3.26 95CI 2.01 to 5.28). Patients who had primary closure or delayed primary closure had a decrease risk of an event compared to those requiring additional soft-tissue reconstruction. (OR=0.18; 95CI, 0.09 to 0.35, and OR= 0.29 CI 0.14 to 0.62 respectively)
- Reamed nailing had a decreased risk of negative outcomes than unreamed for patients with closed fractures (OR=0.60 95CI 0.40 to 0.92) (p=0.02). This relationship was no longer significant with the removal of autodynamization from the composite.
¿Qué es lo que más debo recordar?
The multivariable analysis identified a number of prognostic factors for negative events during the treatment of open and closed tibial shaft fractures. An increased risk of a negative event was found for high energy fractures, stainless steel nails vs titanium nails, fracture gaps, full postoperative weight bearing, and open fractures treated with reamed nailing.
¿Cómo afectará esto al cuidado de mis pacientes?
The findings from this study have identified a number of prognostic factors that may indicate an increased risk of a negative event during treatment of tibial fractures. The findings from this study can assist in identifying the best possible treatment option depending on the characteristics of the injury and instrumentation available.
DESCARGO DE RESPONSABILIDAD
El contenido de esta página tiene únicamente fines informativos y no pretende sustituir el consejo, diagnóstico o tratamiento médico profesional. Si necesita tratamiento médico, busque siempre el consejo de su médico o acuda al servicio de urgencias más cercano. Las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista expresados por las personas sobre el contenido que se encuentra en esta página no reflejan las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista de OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 artículos mensuales GRATIS desbloqueados
