Ultrasound-Guided Manipulation does not Prevent Malalignment Over Landmark-Based Fracture Reduction in Distal Radius Fracture (Colles).

Abstract

<h4>Introduction</h4>This systematic review aims to determine the relative risk of distal radius (Colles) fracture (DRF) malalignment between ultrasound (USG)-guided and conventional/landmark guided/blind manipulation and reduction (M&R).<h4>Methods</h4>We searched 3932 records from major electronic bibliographic databases on USG-guided manipulation of DRF. Studies with randomized, quasi-randomized, and cross-sectional study designs meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this review. USG and landmark-guided DRF manipulations were named cases and controls, respectively. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of included studies.<h4>Results</h4>Thirteen and nine studies were analysed for qualitative and quantitative analysis in this review. Nine hundred fifty-one DRF patients (475 cases and 476 controls) from 9 studies with mean ages of 51.52 ± 11.86 (22-92) and 55.82 ± 11.28 (18-98) years for cases and controls were pooled for this review. The pooled relative risk estimate from the studies included in the meta-analysis was 0.90 (0.74-1.09). There was a 10% decrease in the risk of malalignment with USG than the landmark guided M&R of DRF. The <i>I</i>² statistic estimated a heterogeneity of 83%. Sensitivity analysis revealed a relative risk of 1.00 (0.96-1.05).<h4>Conclusion</h4>The USG-guided manipulation does not prevent malalignment over the landmark-based manipulation of DRF. The risk of bias across the included studies and heterogeneity of 83% mandates further unbiased, high-quality studies to verify the findings of this review.