A systematic review and meta-analysis of two different managements for supracondylar humeral fractures in children

Abstract

Abstract Background The objective of this meta-analysis was to illustrate the clinical outcomes and safety of two different managements for supracondylar humeral fractures in children. Methods In January 2018, a systematic computer-based search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google database. Data on patients prepared for two different managements for supracondylar humeral fractures in children were retrieved. The primary endpoint was the cosmetic and clinical outcomes based on the criteria of Flynn, ulnar nerve injury, and the occurrence of infection. After testing for publication bias and heterogeneity between studies, data were aggregated for random-effects models when necessary. Results Six clinical studies with 581 patients were ultimately included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the closed reduction and percutaneous cross-pinning, and open reduction and internal fixation in terms of the cosmetic and clinical outcomes based on the criteria of Flynn, ulnar nerve injury, and the occurrence of infection (P > 0.05). Conclusions Closed reduction and percutaneous pinning, and open reduction and internal fixation of supracondylar humeral fractures in children result in similar construct stability and functional outcome. More high quality randomized controlled trials are needed to identify this conclusion.

Keywords

• Closed reduction
• Supracondylar humeral fractures
• Meta-analysis