Linked Life Data

19841919

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/19841919

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
8
pubmed:dateCreated
2010-11-10
pubmed:abstractText
The choice between reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of open and closed tibial fractures is an ongoing controversy. We carried out a comprehensive search strategy. Six eligible randomised controlled trials were included. Three reviewers independently assessed methodological quality and extracted outcome data. Analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.0. The results showed lower risks of tibial fracture nonunion and implant failures with reamed nails compared to unreamed nails in closed tibial fractures [relative risk (RR): 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21-0.89, P?=?0.008 for nonunion and RR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.22-0.56, P?<?0.0001 for implant failures], but no statistical differences in risk reduction of malunion, compartment syndrome, embolism and infection. Our results suggested no statistical differences in risk reduction of all the complications evaluated between reamed and unreamed nails in open tibial fractures. In conclusion, our study recommended reamed nails for the treatment of closed tibial fractures. But the choice for open tibial fractures remains uncertain.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Dec
pubmed:issn
1432-5195
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Electronic
pubmed:volume
34
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
1307-13
pubmed:dateRevised
2011-4-20
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2010
pubmed:articleTitle
Reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of open and closed tibial fractures: a subgroup analysis of randomised trials.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Orthopaedics, Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, People's Republic of China.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Meta-Analysis