Intramedullary nail fixation versus open reduction and internal fixation for treatment of adult diaphyseal forearm fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 2 Fracture characteristics of included studies

Study	Treatment	Fracture types			AO/OTA classification			Open fractures (%)
Study	Treatment	Radius (%)	Ulna (%)	BBFF (%)	Type A (%)	Type B (%)	Type C (%)	Open fractures (%)
Both-bone forearm fractures
Lee et al. [9]	IMN	0	0	100	46	54	0	26
Lee et al. [9]	ORIF	0	0	100	47	53	0	31
Ozkaya et al. [26]	IMN	0	0	100	-*	-	-	5
Ozkaya et al. [26]	ORIF	0	0	100	-*	-	-	9
Polat and Toy [24]	IMN	0	0	100	43	43	14	38
Polat and Toy [24]	ORIF	0	0	100	44	36	20	36
Zhang et al. [22]	IMN	0	0	100	32	32	36	-**
Zhang et al. [22]	ORIF	0	0	100	38	24	38	-**
Isolated ulna fractures
Kibar and Kurtulmuş [28]	IMN	0	100	0	52	41	7	7
Kibar and Kurtulmuş [28]	ORIF	0	100	0	73	20	7	7
Pavone et al. [25]	IMN	0	100	0	-	-	-	-**
Pavone et al. [25]	ORIF	0	100	0	-	-	-	-**
Sisman and Polat [23]	IMN	0	100	0	62	38	0	-**
Sisman and Polat [23]	ORIF	0	100	0	76	24	0	-**
Isolated radius fractures
Kibar and Kurtulmuş [29]	IMN	100	0	0	78	22	0	15
Kibar and Kurtulmuş [29]	ORIF	100	0	0	68	27	5	5
Mixed fractures
Köse et al. [27]	IMN	31	31	38	38	31	31	25
Köse et al. [27]	ORIF	33	29	38	36	36	29	19
Overall [n(%)]^†
	IMN	42 (17%)	80 (34%)	116 (49%)	102 (43%)	77 (32%)	30 (12%)
	ORIF	36 (15%)	81 (35%)	116 (50%)	104 (45%)	64 (27%)	29 (12%)

*A3 was most common, breakdown not reported; **Excluded open fractures; ^†29 fractures not classified by the AO classification with IMN; 36 not classified with ORIF (BBFF, Both-bone Forearm Fractures; IMN, Intramedullary Nail; ORIF, Open Reduction and Internal Fixation)

ISSN: 1749-799X