Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Feb 1;35(2):59-64.
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001910.

Systematic Review and Analysis of the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Reamed and Unreamed Intramedullary Nailing of Tibial Fractures

DesRaj Clark  1 , Loc-Uyen Vo  2 , Andres S Piscoya  1 , Andrew Chan  3 , John C Dunn  3
Affiliations

Systematic Review and Analysis of the Quality of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Reamed and Unreamed Intramedullary Nailing of Tibial Fractures

DesRaj Clark et al. J Orthop Trauma. .

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the quality of research and reporting of randomized controlled trials comparing the use of reamed and unreamed intramedullary nails for tibial fractures with validated scoring systems.

Data source: PubMed using the search terms "tibia" AND "reamed OR unreamed" AND "intramedullary OR nail." Filters were applied for the years 1991-2019, full articles, human subjects, and English language.

Study selection: Inclusion criteria were (1) prospective and randomized trials, (2) studies reported >80% follow-up, and (3) articles amenable to scoring with the chosen scoring systems. Exclusion criteria were (1) skeletally immature patients or (2) incomplete data sets.

Data extraction: Articles were assessed with the Coleman Methodology Score, the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials systems, and Cowan's Categorical Rating by 2 independent observers.

Data synthesis: Scores for individual articles were averaged for the 2 observers. The total and subcategory scores for all included articles were also averaged with SD from both observers. Categories from the 2 grading systems with deficient reporting were measured as a percentage based on grading from both observers. Data were analyzed using kappa statistic and correlation coefficient to assess agreement and reliability.

Conclusions: All included articles supported the use of reamed tibial intramedullary nails, but the overall quality of the literature fell in the middle of both the modified Coleman Score and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials grading scheme ranges despite being Oxford Level 1.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Russel TA. Fractures of the Tibial Diaphysis. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 1996:171–179.
    1. Lin CA, Swiontkowski M, Bhandari M, et al. Reaming does not affect functional outcomes after open and closed tibial shaft fractures: the results of a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Trauma. 2016;30:142–148.
    1. Deleanu B, Prejbeanu R, Poenaru D, et al. Reamed versus unreamed intramedullary locked nailing in tibial fractures. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2014;24:1597–1601.
    1. Gaebler C, McQueen MM, Vécsei V, et al. Reamed versus minimally reamed nailing: a prospectively randomised study of 100 patients with closed fractures of the tibia. Injury. 2011;42(suppl 4):S17–S21.
    1. Xue D, Zheng Q, Li H, et al. Reamed and unreamed intramedullary nailing for the treatment of open and closed tibial fractures: a subgroup analysis of randomised trials. Int Orthop. 2010;34:1307–1313.

Publication types