Unstable ankle fractures: Better clinical results with metal versus biodegradable implants .
Cette étude a été identifiée comme étant potentiellement à fort impact.
L'indicateur High Impact de l'ENP, basé sur l'IA, estime l'influence qu'un article est susceptible d'avoir en intégrant des signaux provenant à la fois de la revue dans laquelle il est publié et du contenu scientifique de l'article lui-même.
Développé à l'aide d'un traitement du langage naturel de pointe, le modèle High Impact de l'ENP prédit avec plus de précision les futures citations d'une étude que le seul facteur d'impact de la revue.
Cela permet d'identifier plus tôt les recherches cliniquement significatives et aide les lecteurs à se concentrer sur les articles les plus susceptibles d'influencer les pratiques futures.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(6):38 J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Nov 21;94(22):e1661-7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.01221109 patients with unstable ankle fractures, requiring surgical intervention, were included in this study to compare clinical outcomes of metal and biodegradable implant fixations. Patients who underwent fixation using a metal implant had a shorter mean operative time, required less time to bone union, and had superior American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ankle-hindfoot scale scores at 12 months. Patients in the metal implant group also had fewer non-unions when compared to the biodegradable implants; however, this difference was not significant.
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)?
Oui = 1
Incertain = 0,5
Non pertinent = 0
Non = 0
L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.
2/4
Randomization
2/4
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
L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.
Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?
Due to the complexity of displaced ankle fractures surgical reduction and fixation are required to ensure the best functional recovery. Metallic implants are often used to provide adequate stability; however, metallic implants have a number of theoretical and practical disadvantages, including stress shielding and the need for possible secondary operations to remove the implant. The use of biodegradable implants, as an alternative for internal fixator for ankle fractures, was introduced in the 1980's, and the advent of new technologies have led to the development of numerous biodegradable materials - each with different characteristics. Comparisons between biodegradable implants made of polylevolactic acid and metallic implants for fixations of displaced ankle fractures have yet to be conducted using a randomized trial.
Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?
Does the use of biodegradable implants, made of polylevolactic acid, provide similar clinical and functional outcomes compared to the use of metallic implants for the fixation of unstable ankle fractures, assessed over a 12 month period?
- The mean operative time in group 1 (Metal) was 30.2 +/- 4.5 minutes compared to the mean operative time of 56.6 +/- 10.7 minutes (p<0.001) in group 2 (Bio)
- There were no differences in the reduction of medial malleolus, lateral malleolus, posterior malleolus, and syndesmosis. 6 of 12 patients in group 2 (Bio) with medial malleolar fractures had a fracture gap postoperatively or during follow-up.
- Mean time to bone union was significantly shorter in group 1 (Metal) compared to group 2 (Bio) (p=0.002): 15.8 weeks and 17.6 weeks, respectively.
- Mean AOFAS scores were greater in group 1 (Metal): 87.5+/-3.8 compared to group 2 (Bio): 84.3+/-6.6 (p=0.004)
- There were no differences SMFA dysfunction and bother indexes between the two groups (p=0.06 and 0.052, respectively); although, there was a trend present towards better scores in group 1 (Metal).
- A subgroup of patients with lateral malleolar fractures did not demonstrate differences in clinical outcomes between groups.
- There were two non-unions in group 2 (Bio) and none in group 1 (Metal) (p=0.228)
- 18 of 53 patients in group 1(Metal) had hardware removal surgery.
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?
Fixation of unstable ankle fractures with metal implants required significantly less operative time, resulted in shorter time to radiographic union, and superior AOFAS scores;however, it is unclear if this difference in AOFAS scores was clinically relevant. The use of a metallic implant also resulted in fewer non-unions, but this difference was not significant.
Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?
Metal implants provide superior outcomes for unstable ankle fractures compared to biodegradable implants made of polylevolactic acid. The use of a metal implant reduces operative time, time to union, and improves some functional measures; however, further clinical trials are necessary to support the findings of this study. Additionally, comparisons between metal implants and other biodegradable materials need to be conducted.
AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ
Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
