Sinus tarsi approach versus the extended lateral approach for displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to review eligible randomized controlled trials to determine the efficacy of the sinus tarsi approach (STA) versus the extended lateral approach (ELA) for the treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures (DIACF).

METHODS: Using appropriate keywords, we identified relevant studies using PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, VANFUN, and VIP. Key pertinent sources in the literature were also reviewed, and all articles published through June 2020 were considered for inclusion. For each study, we assessed odds ratios (ORs), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) to assess and synthesize the outcomes.

RESULTS: We included 15 RCTs, with a total of 847 patients in the STA group and 959 in the ELA group. The results found that after STA and ELA, no significant difference in changes of Böhler's angle (WMD: 0.746, 95% CI: - 0.316-1.809), Gissane angle (WMD: - 0.710, 95% CI: - 2.157-0.737), calcaneal heights (WMD: 0.378, 95% CI: - 1.973-2.728), calcaneal widths (SMD: - 0.431, 95% CI: - 1.604- 0.742), calcaneal lengths (WMD: 0.691, 95% CI: - 0.749-2.131). Besides, there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the STA group and the ELA group (RR: 0.592, 95% CI: 0.336-1.045).

CONCLUSION: There was no difference in clinical efficacy between STA and ELA in treating DIACF. Besides, there is still a need of large-sample, high-quality, long-term randomized controlled trials to confirm the conclusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I-High-Quality Prospective Randomized Study.