Amputation Versus Limb Reconstruction for Fibula Hemimelia: A Meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Fibula hemimelia is the most common congenital deficiency of long bones. Primary treatment options include amputation with prosthetic fitting or limb reconstruction. The aim of our study was to conduct a systematic review comparing amputation with limb reconstruction for fibula hemimelia. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Elsevier Scopus, and the Cochrane Registry of Clinical Trials were searched from 1951 to 2019 for studies that evaluated amputation versus limb reconstruction for fibula hemimelia. Random effect models were utilized for the meta-analytic comparisons of amputation versus limb reconstruction for patient satisfaction and surgical complications. Descriptive, quantitative, and qualitative data were extracted. RESULTS: Seven retrospective cohort studies were eligible for the meta-analysis, with a total of 169 fibula hemimelia cases. Amputation resulted in an odds ratio of 6.8 (95% confidence interval 2.4, 19.2) when compared with limb reconstruction in terms of patient satisfaction. Furthermore, limb reconstruction was found to have an odds ratio of 28 (95% confidence interval 7.8, 100.3) for complications. The total surgical complication rates in the amputation and limb reconstruction groups were 0.2 and 1.2 complications per limb. The rate of surgical procedures per patient was 1.5 and 4.2 for amputation and limb reconstruction, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative evidence at present indicates better patient satisfaction with less surgical complications and less number of procedures with amputation for fibula hemimelia when compared with limb reconstruction. Absence of uniform protocols make it difficult to compare results accurately. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level III-therapeutic.