nach oben

European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery

Erschienen in:

31.05.2021 | Original Article

The fragility and reverse fragility indices of proximal humerus fracture randomized controlled trials: a systematic review

verfasst von: Peter William Kyriakides, Blake Joseph Schultz, Kenneth Egol, Philipp Leucht

Erschienen in: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery | Ausgabe 6/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

The quality of evidence of the orthopedic literature has been often called into question. The fragility index (FI) has emerged as a means to evaluate the robustness of a significant result. Similarly, reverse fragility index (RFI) can be used for nonsignificant results to evaluate whether one can confidently conclude that there is no difference between groups. The analysis of FI and RFI in proximal humerus fracture (PHF) management is of particular interest, given ongoing controversy regarding optimal management and patient selection. The aim of this study was to report the FI, RFI and quality of the evidence in the proximal humerus fracture literature.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted based on the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines, which utilized EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases. Inclusion criteria included randomized controlled clinical trials related to the management of proximal humerus fractures, published from 2000 to 2020 with dichotomous outcome measures and 1:1 allocation. The FI and RFI were calculated by successively changing one nonevent to an event for each outcome measure until the result was made nonsignificant or significant, respectively. The fragility quotient, (FQ), calculated by dividing the FI by the total sample size, was calculated as well.

Results

There were 25 studies that met our criteria with 48 outcome measures recorded. A total of 21 studies had at least one fragile result, with ten studies including a fragile result in the conclusion of the abstract. A total of 31 outcome measures had nonsignificant results and the median RFI was found to be 4, with 71% greater than number of patients lost to follow up. Seventeen outcomes had significant results, with a median FI of 1, with 65% greater than or equal to the number patients lost to follow up. A total of 18 of 25 studies (72%) included a power analysis. In particular, ten studies reported a statistical analysis of complication rates, 90% of which were fragile. The median FQ was found to be 0.037.

Conclusions

The literature on PHF management is frequently fragile. Outcome measures are often fragile, particularly with regards to comparing complication rates and reoperation rates in treatment arms. Comparing to the studies in other subspecialties PHF RCTs are relatively more fragile and underpowered. Standardized reporting of FI, FQ and RFI can help the reader to reliably draw conclusions based on the fragility of outcome measures.

Lefaivre KA, Slobogean GP. Understanding systematic reviews and meta-analyses in orthopaedics. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013;21(4):245–55. Doi: https://search.datacite.org/works/https://doi.org/10.5435/jaaos-21-04-245. Accessed 18 Nov 2020

Walsh M, Srinathan SK, McAuley DF, et al. The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: a case for a fragility index. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(6):622–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.10.019. Accessed 18 Nov 2020CrossRefPubMed

Evaniew N, Files C, Smith C, et al. The fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized trials in spine surgery: a systematic survey. Spine J. 2015;15(10):2188–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.06.004.CrossRefPubMed

Schumaier A, Grawe B. Proximal humerus fractures: evaluation and management in the elderly patient. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil. 2018;9. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/2151458517750516. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5788098/. Accessed 18 Nov 2020.

Ruzbarsky JJ, Rauck RC, Manzi J, Khormaee S, Jivanelli B, Warren RF. The fragility of findings of randomized controlled trials in shoulder and elbow surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019;28(12):2409–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2019.04.051.CrossRefPubMed

Checketts JX, Scott JT, Meyer C, Horn J, Jones J, Vassar M. The robustness of trials that guide evidence-based orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2018;100(12):e85. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.17.01039.CrossRef

Khan MS, Fonarow GC, Friede T, et al. Application of the reverse fragility index to statistically nonsignificant randomized clinical trial results. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(8). Doi: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.12469. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7407075/. Accessed 19 Nov 2020.

Beks RB, Ochen Y, Frima H, et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment of proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and comparison of observational studies and randomized controlled trials. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018;27(8):1526–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2018.03.009.CrossRefPubMed

Soler-Peiro M, García-Martínez L, Aguilella L, Perez-Bermejo M. Conservative treatment of 3-part and 4-part proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020;15(1):347. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01880-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Ong CC, Kwon YW, Walsh M, Davidovitch R, Zuckerman JD, Egol KA. Outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures managed with locking plates. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2012;41(9):407–12.PubMed

11.

Robinson CM, Stirling PHC, Goudie EB, MacDonald DJ, Strelzow JA. Complications and long-term outcomes of open reduction and plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2019;101(23):2129–39. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.19.00595.CrossRef

12.

Lekic N, Montero N, Takemoto R, Davidovitch R, Egol K. Treatment of two-part proximal humerus fractures: intramedullary nail compared to locked plating. HSS J. 2012;8(2):86–91. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11420-012-9274-z. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23874244. Accessed 18 Nov 2020

13.

Hasty EK, Jernigan EW, Soo A, Varkey DT, Kamath GV. Trends in surgical management and costs for operative treatment of proximal humerus fractures in the elderly. Orthopedics. 2017;40(4):e641–7. https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20170411-03.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Khatib O, Onyekwelu I, Yu S, Zuckerman JD. Shoulder arthroplasty in New York state, 1991 to 2010: changing patterns of utilization. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;24(10):286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.05.038.CrossRef

15.

Floyd SB, Campbell J, Chapman CG, Thigpen CA, Kissenberth MJ, Brooks JM. Geographic variation in the treatment of proximal humerus fracture: an update on surgery rates and treatment consensus. J Orthop Surg Res. 2019;14(1):22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-1052-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Bomze D, Meirson T. A critique of the fragility index. Lancet Oncol. 2019;20(10):e551. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30582-0.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Rouleau DM, Balg F, Benoit B, et al. Deltopectoral vs. deltoid split approach for proximal HUmerus fracture fixation with locking plate: a prospective randomized study (HURA). J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020;29(11):2190–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2020.06.020.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Buecking B, Mohr J, Bockmann B, Zettl R, Ruchholtz S. Deltoid-split or deltopectoral approaches for the treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(5):1576–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3415-7.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Agorastides I, Sinopidis C, El Meligy M, Yin Q, Brownson P, Frostick SP. Early versus late mobilization after hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(3 Suppl):33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.07.004.CrossRef

20.

Lefevre-Colau MM, Babinet A, Fayad F, et al. Immediate mobilization compared with conventional immobilization for the impacted nonoperatively treated proximal humeral fracture. A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2007;89(12):2582–90. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.01419.CrossRef

21.

Carbone S, Razzano C, Albino P, Mezzoprete R. Immediate intensive mobilization compared with immediate conventional mobilization for the impacted osteoporotic conservatively treated proximal humeral fracture: a randomized controlled trial. Musculoskelet Surg. 2017;101(Suppl 2):137–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-017-0483-y.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Chen X, Yu Z, Wang H, et al. Proximal humeral internal locking plate combined with a custom neutral-position shoulder and elbow sling for proximal humerus fractures: a randomized study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(17):e15271. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000015271.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Hengg C, Nijs S, Klopfer T, et al. Cement augmentation of the proximal humerus internal locking system in elderly patients: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019;139(7):927–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-019-03142-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Peng C, Wang H, Yan J, Song T. Locking system strengthened by biomimetic mineralized collagen putty for the treatment of osteoporotic proximal humeral fractures. Regen Biomater. 2017;4(5):289–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/rb/rbx016.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Biermann N, Schirren M, Siebenbürger G, et al. Glenohumeral joint lavage does not affect clinical outcomes in open reduction and internal fixation of displaced intracapsular proximal humeral fractures: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020;29(9):1758–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2020.04.026.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Jin L, Guo J, Guo J, Yin Y, Hou Z, Zhang Y. Clinical effects of the probing method with depth gauge for determining the screw depth of locking proximal humeral plate. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:5898161. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/5898161.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Soliman OA, Koptan WMT. Proximal humeral fractures treated with hemiarthroplasty: does tenodesis of the long head of the biceps improve results? Injury. 2013;44(4):461–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2012.09.012.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Sohn H, Jeon YS, Lee J, Shin S. Clinical comparison between open plating and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for displaced proximal humeral fractures: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Injury. 2017;48(6):1175–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.027.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Zhang L, Zheng J, Wang W, et al. The clinical benefit of medial support screws in locking plating of proximal humerus fractures: a prospective randomized study. Int Orthop. 2011;35(11):1655–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1227-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Gracitelli MEC, Malavolta EA, Assunção JH, et al. Locking intramedullary nails compared with locking plates for two- and three-part proximal humeral surgical neck fractures: a randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016;25(5):695–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.02.003.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Plath JE, Kerschbaum C, Seebauer T, et al. Locking nail versus locking plate for proximal humeral fracture fixation in an elderly population: a prospective randomised controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019;20(1):20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2399-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Helfen T, Siebenbürger G, Fleischhacker E, Gleich J, Böcker W, Ockert B. Operative treatment of 2-part surgical neck type fractures of the proximal humerus in the elderly: cement augmented locking plate PHILOS^TM vs. proximal humerus nail multiloc®. Injury. 2020;51(10):2245–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2020.06.026.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Zhu Y, Lu Y, Shen J, Zhang J, Jiang C. Locking intramedullary nails and locking plates in the treatment of two-part proximal humeral surgical neck fractures: a prospective randomized trial with a minimum of three years of follow-up. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2011;93(2):159–68. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.00155.CrossRef

34.

Lopiz Y, Garcia-Coiradas J, Garcia-Fernandez C, Marco F. Proximal humerus nailing: a randomized clinical trial between curvilinear and straight nails. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(3):369–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.08.023.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Chen H, Ji X, Gao Y, et al. Comparison of intramedullary fibular allograft with locking compression plate versus shoulder hemi-arthroplasty for repair of osteoporotic four-part proximal humerus fracture: consecutive, prospective, controlled, and comparative study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016;102(3):287–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2015.12.021.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Fialka C, Stampfl P, Arbes S, Reuter P, Oberleitner G, Vécsei V. Primary hemiarthroplasty in four-part fractures of the proximal humerus: randomized trial of two different implant systems. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17(2):210–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2007.07.002.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Sebastiá-Forcada E, Cebrián-Gómez R, Lizaur-Utrilla A, Gil-Guillén V. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures. A blinded, randomized, controlled, prospective study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(10):1419–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.06.035.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Lopiz Y, Alcobia-Diaz B, Galan-Olleros M, Garcia-Fernandez C, Picado AL, Marco F. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus nonoperative treatment for 3- or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019;28(12):59–2271 (S1058-2746(19)30465-3[pii]).CrossRef

39.

Rangan A, Handoll H, Brealey S, et al. Surgical vs nonsurgical treatment of adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus: the PROFHER randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;313(10):1037–47. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.1629.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Handoll H, Brealey S, Rangan A, et al. The ProFHER (PROximal fracture of the humerus: evaluation by randomisation) trial—a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical compared with non-surgical treatment for proximal fracture of the humerus in adults. Health Technol Assess. 2015;19(24):1–280. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta19240.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Launonen AP, Sumrein BO, Reito A, et al. Operative versus non-operative treatment for 2-part proximal humerus fracture: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. PLoS Med. 2019;16(7):e1002855. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002855.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Parisien RL, Dashe J, Cronin PK, Bhandari M, Tornetta P. Statistical significance in trauma research: too unstable to trust? J Orthop Trauma. 2019;33(12):e466–70. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000001595.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Khormaee S, Choe J, Ruzbarsky JJ, et al. The fragility of statistically significant results in pediatric orthopaedic randomized controlled trials as quantified by the fragility index: a systematic review. J Pediatr Orthop. 2018;38(8):e418–23. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000001201.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Parisien RL, Trofa DP, Dashe J, et al. Statistical fragility and the role of P values in the sports medicine literature. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019;27(7):e324–9. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00636.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Ruzbarsky JJ, Khormaee S, Daluiski A. The fragility index in hand surgery randomized controlled trials. J Hand Surg Am. 2019;44(8):698.e1-e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2018.10.005.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Forrester LA, Jang E, Lawson MM, Capi A, Tyler WK. Statistical fragility of surgical and procedural clinical trials in orthopaedic oncology. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2020. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-19-00152.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: The fragility and reverse fragility indices of proximal humerus fracture randomized controlled trials: a systematic review
verfasst von: Peter William Kyriakides
Blake Joseph Schultz
Kenneth Egol
Philipp Leucht
Publikationsdatum: 31.05.2021
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery / Ausgabe 6/2022
Print ISSN: 1863-9933
Elektronische ISSN: 1863-9941
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-021-01684-2

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

The fragility and reverse fragility indices of proximal humerus fracture randomized controlled trials: a systematic review

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

TEP mit Roboterhilfe führt nicht zu größerer Zufriedenheit

Lever-Sign-Test hilft beim Verdacht auf Kreuzbandriss

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

Aquatherapie bei Fibromyalgie wirksamer als Trockenübungen

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2022

Fragment specific fixation with APTUS wrist system for volar rim fractures of the distal radius: a multicentric study

Treatment of upper extremity nerve defects by direct suturing in high elbow or wrist flexion

Mortality risk stratification in isolated severe traumatic brain injury using the revised cardiac risk index

The effect of cerclage wiring with intramedullary nail surgery in proximal femoral fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Complications and range of motion of patients with an elbow dislocation treated with a hinged external fixator: a retrospective cohort study

Emergency department thoracotomy in a physician-staffed trauma system: the experience of a French Military level-1 trauma center

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

TEP mit Roboterhilfe führt nicht zu größerer Zufriedenheit

Lever-Sign-Test hilft beim Verdacht auf Kreuzbandriss

Ein Drittel der jungen Ärztinnen und Ärzte erwägt abzuwandern

Aquatherapie bei Fibromyalgie wirksamer als Trockenübungen

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie