Volar locking plate versus external fixation in distal radius fractures: A meta-analysis

Abstract

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the efficacy of plate or external fixator treatments in distal radius fractures, based not only on clinical and radiographic parameters but on Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) parameters. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Metanalyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed when conducting this systematic review. The Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (RAMSTAR) checklist was additionally consulted in order to ensure a high-quality methodological process, encompassing such elements as an ‘a priori’ design, independent reviews and comprehensive search. The literature search was carried out on PubMed, MEDLINE and Scopus. The search terms used were “Radius fracture AND osteosynthesis”, “Wrist fracture AND external fixator” and “Wrist fracture AND plate”. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. To determine inter-reviewer agreement, a k score was calculated after each screening state. Of the 5753 studies collected through the initial databases search, two studies were included in the final meta-analysis (125 treated with external fixator vs 132 with volar plate). There was a substantial inter-reviewer agreement as to the title (0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.79) abstract (0.65; 95% CI, 0.46-0.83) and fulltext screening stages (0.89; 95%CI, 0.67-1). The meta-analysis reported a mean difference equal to 0.00 (95%CI= -0.05 – 0.05), in accordance with I2= 0% and p test for the heterogeneity value=0.089. This meta analysis confirms and quantifies that the two techniques are superimposable as regards the quality of life reported by patients at least one year of follow-up.