Search

Background: Traditionally, acute undisplaced or minimally-displaced scaphoid fractures are treated by casting in short- or long-arm casts. Although reports have shown that operative treatment is safe, effective and produces satisfactory results, outcomes from current studies comparing these two methods are questionable. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of operative versus non-operative treatment for acute undisplaced or minimally-displaced scaphoid fractures in adults. Methods: Computerized searches were performed without language restrictions and all randomized controlled studies providing information on the effects of operative versus non-operative treatment on the outcomes of acute undisplaced or minimally-displaced scaphoid fractures were included. The weighted and standard mean difference (WMD and SMD) or the relative risk (RR) were calculated for continuous or dichotomous data respectively. Results: A total of six studies reported in seven publications were included, representing data on 340 fractures. Meta-analysis indicated that operative treatment resulted in significantly better functional outcomes in the short term when compared with non-operative treatment. Consistently, patients who accepted surgery had a more rapid return to work. Further, surgery was advantageous in preventing delayed union of the fractures, a finding supported by the results of analysis of the time to fracture union. A number-needed-to-treat analysis revealed that more than 20 patients would have to undergo operative treatment to prevent one delayed union. Conclusion: Acute undisplaced or minimally-displaced scaphoid fractures demonstrate faster recovery with operative treatment; however, the current meta-analysis does not provide evidence supporting the routine use of operative treatment for all acute undisplaced or minimally-displaced scaphoid fractures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bisphosphonates and parathyroid hormone (PTH) represent the antiresorptive and anabolic classes of drugs for osteoporosis treatment. Bone mineral density (BMD) is an essential parameter for the evaluation of anti-osteoporotic drugs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of PTH versus bisphosphonates on BMD for the treatment of osteoporosis., Methods/principal Findings: We performed a literature search to identify studies that investigated the effects of PTH versus bisphosphonates treatment on BMD. A total of 7 articles were included in this study, representing data on 944 subjects. The pooled data showed that the percent change of increased BMD in the spine is higher with PTH compared to bisphosphonates (WMD = 5.90, 95% CI: 3.69-8.10, p<0.01,). In the hip, high dose (40 µg) PTH (1-34) showed significantly higher increments of BMD compared to alendronate (femoral neck: WMD = 5.67, 95% CI: 3.47-7.87, p<0.01; total hip: WMD = 2.40, 95%CI: 0.49-4.31, p<0.05). PTH treatment has yielded significantly higher increments than bisphosphonates with a duration of over 12 months (femoral neck: WMD = 5.67, 95% CI: 3.47-7.86, p<0.01; total hip: WMD = 2.40, 95% CI: 0.49-4.31, P<0.05) and significantly lower increments at 12 months (femoral neck: WMD = -1.05, 95% CI: -2.26-0.16, p<0.01; total hip: WMD: -1.69, 95% CI: -3.05-0.34, p<0.05). In the distal radius, a reduction in BMD was significant between PTH and alendronate treatment. (WMD = -3.68, 95% CI: -5.57-1.79, p<0.01)., Discussion: Our results demonstrated that PTH significantly increased lumbar spine BMD as compared to treatment with bisphosphonates and PTH treatment induced duration- and dose-dependent increases in hip BMD as compared to bisphosphonates treatment. This study has also disclosed that for the distal radius, BMD was significantly lower from PTH treatment than alendronate treatment.