Reamed versus unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures among adults: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

BACKGROUND\nThe purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the merits and drawbacks between reamed intramedullary nailing (RIN) and unreamed intramedullary nailing (URIN) among adults.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe comprehensively searched PubMed, MEDLINE database through the PubMed search engine, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Embase, VIPI (Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals), and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) from inception to March 2020. Outcomes of interest included nonunion rates, implant failure rates, secondary procedure rates, blood loss, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) rates, and pulmonary complications rates.\n\n\nRESULTS\nEight randomized controlled trials were included. The result of nonunion rates shows that the nonunion rate is significantly lower in the RIN group (RR\xa0=\xa00.20, 95% CI\xa0=\xa00.09-0.48, Z\xa0=\xa03.63, P\xa0=\xa00.0003). There were no significant differences for the risk of implant failure rates (RR\xa0=\xa00.55, 95% CI\xa0=\xa00.18-1.69, Z\xa0=\xa01.04, P\xa0=\xa00.30). The secondary procedure rates were significantly lower in the RIN group (RR\xa0=\xa00.28, 95% CI\xa0=\xa00.12-0.66, Z\xa0=\xa02.91, P\xa0=\xa00.004). The result shows that the blood loss of URIN group is significantly lower (RR\xa0=\xa0145.52, 95% CI\xa0=\xa039.68-251.36, Z\xa0=\xa02.69, P\xa0=\xa00.007). The result shows that there was no significant difference in the ARDS rates (RR\xa0=\xa01.53, 95% CI\xa0=\xa00.37-6.29, Z\xa0=\xa00.59, P\xa0=\xa00.55) and the pulmonary complications rates between RIN group and URIN group (RR\xa0=\xa01.59, 95% CI\xa0=\xa00.61-4.17, Z\xa0=\xa00.94, P\xa0=\xa00.35).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nReamed intramedullary nailing would lead to lower nonunion rate, secondary procedure rate and more blood loss. Unreamed intramedullary nailing is related to a higher nonunion rate, secondary procedure rate and less blood loss. No significant difference is found in implant failure rate, ARDS rate and pulmonary complication rate between the two groups.