![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Background: Whether minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis (MIPO) or other operative interventions is superior in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively compare the clinical outcomes of MIPO and other operative interventions in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Methods: Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify all available studies comparing clinical outcomes between patients receiving MIPO and other operative interventions. The weight mean difference (WMD) was pooled to compare the operative time, union time, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score, and Mayo elbow performance index (MEPI).The risk ratio (RR) was pooled to compare the union rate, and incidence of complications. Pooled estimates were calculated by using a fixed-effects model or a randomized-effects model, according to the heterogeneity among studies. Results: Nine studies were included in this meta-analysis. Our results suggest that both MIPO and other operative interventions can achieve similar union time, UCLA score, MEPI, and union rate. However, MIPO is associated with better outcomes including shorter operation time, and lower incidence of radial nerve injury. Conclusion: Evidence from this meta-analysis demonstrated that, MIPO is effective but safer than other operative interventions in the treatment of humeral shaft fracture. However, due to the potential limitations in this meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes using appropriate blinding methods are needed to confirm these findings.