Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 10;3(4):E396–E405. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20140130

Table 3: Summary of secondary operation and complication rates, and functional outcome in trials comparing operative interventions.

Study Secondaryoperations Risk ratio(95% CI) Complications not requiring surgical intervention Risk ratio (95% CI) Functional outcome: constant score (1 yr) Mean difference (95% CI)
Assobhi et al.37
AI reconstruction plate (n = 19) 1 nonunion1 wound infection and implant loosening 0.67(0.13 to 3.55) 1 nonunion 1.00 (0.23 to 4.34) 89.8 (11.3) -5.60(-11.21 to 0.01)
RTEN (n = 19) 3 prominent nails NR 95.5 (5.3)
Bi et al.38
Retrograde percutaneous pin (n = 101) NR NA NR 0.11(0.01 to 2.02) NR NA
Kirshner pin (n = 100) NR 4 nonunions NR
Ferran et al.39
Rockwood pin (n = 17) 1 implant loosening 0.22(0.06 to 0.88) NR 0.22(0.06 to 0.88) 92.1 (6)* 3.4(-2.02 to 8.82)
LCDCP (n = 15) 3 superficial infections1 persistent pain4 hardware irritation NR 88.7 (9.1)*
Jiang et al.40
MIPPO (n = 32)LCP (n = 32) NRNR NA NRNR NA 96†95.7† 0.30(-4.70 to 5.30)
Shen et al.41
3D contoured cortical plate (n = 67) 1 delayed union 0.12(0.02 to 0.96) 3 "symptomatic patients" 0.20(0.06 to 0.65) NR NA
Superior reconstruction plate (n = 66) 8 delayed unions 15 "symptomatic patients"

Note: AI = antero-inferior surface, LCDCP = limited contact dynamic compression plate, LCP = locking compression plate, MIPPO = minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis, NA = not applicable, NR = not reported, RTEN = retrograde titanium elastic nail.

*Unclear as to whether this was at 1-year assessment.

†No standard deviation reported; means were abstracted from graphical analyses.