Comparison Between Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Plate Osteosynthesis(MIPPO) And Interlocking Intramedullary Nail (IIN) In Treatment Of Tibia Fracture: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVETo compare the efficacy of minimally invasive percutaneous plateosteosynthesis (MIPPO） and interlocking intramedullary nail (IIN)in treatment of tibia fracture.MethodsSearch Cochrane library, Medline, Elsvier, Chinese BiomedicalDatabase, Wanfang Data for controlled trials comparing MIPPO withIIN in management of tibia fracture,we also search manuallyrelevant references. Methodological quality of the trials was criticallyassessed,and relative data were extracted. Statistical software Revman5.0was used for data-analysis.ResultThirteen studies were included. The meta-analysis results showthat,compared with IIN, MIPPO had shorter uniontime[WMD=-1.20,95%CI(-2.03,-0.37),P<0.05]。 but no statisticallysignificant differences in surgical time [WMD=-10.90,95%CI(-24.93,3.13),P>0.05]， blood loss[WMD=-2.72,95%CI (-6.82,1.38),P>0.05]， post-operative Joher-wrushs score [RR=0.99,95%CI (0.94,1.05),P>0.05] and complications [RR=1.29,95%CI(0.74，2.26,P>0.05].ConclusionCompared with IIN, MIPPO for tibia fracture has shorter uniontime. but shows no difference in regards to the surgical time，blood loss,post-operative Joher-wrushs score, total complication.More clinicaltrials with a better random design and larger number of cases are needed toimprove the efficacy of evidence.