Does the pararectus approach have better outcomes and fewer complications than the modified Stoppa approach for the fixation of acetabular fractures in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis?

Rajesh Kumar Rajnish; Abhay Elhence; Amit Srivastava; Sandeep Kumar Yadav; Prabodh Kantiwal; Saurabh Gupta

doi:10.1007/s00590-024-03885-y

Does the pararectus approach have better outcomes and fewer complications than the modified Stoppa approach for the fixation of acetabular fractures in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis?

Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024 Mar 7. doi: 10.1007/s00590-024-03885-y. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Rajesh Kumar Rajnish^#¹, Abhay Elhence^#¹, Amit Srivastava², Sandeep Kumar Yadav³, Prabodh Kantiwal¹, Saurabh Gupta¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, India.
² Department of Orthopaedics, University College of Medical Sciences and GTB Hospital, Delhi, India.
³ Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, India. drsandeepkyadav@gmail.com.

^# Contributed equally.

PMID: 38451336
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-024-03885-y

Abstract

Background: The pararectus approach is a minimally invasive surgical approach for anterior acetabulum fracture, with an advantage of the medial window of the modified Stoppa approach (MSA). However, it is unclear whether the pararectus approach is superior to MSA. We aimed this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the outcomes and complications of pararectus and MSA.

Methods: We performed a data search by conducting an electronic search across databases of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cinahl, CNKI, and Cochrane Library and included seven comparative studies for analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan software 5.4.1. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool for RCTs and the MINORS tool for non-RCTs.

Results: Two randomized control trials (RCTs), one prospective study, and four retrospective studies were included. Meta-analysis revealed a better Matta's reduction quality [OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.06, 2.37; p = 0.03] and radiological outcome [OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.03, 4.60; p = 0.04] in MSA than in pararectus approach. However, the pararectus approach has less intraoperative blood loss [MD - 9.79 (95% CI - 176.75, - 6.83; p = 0.03)] and a shorter hospital stay [MD - 2.61 (95% CI - 5.03, - .18; p = 0.04)] than MSA. Both approaches have failed to show a difference concerning overall complication rates [OR 0.66 (95% CI 0.28, 1.55; p = 0.34)], postoperative infection, DVT, duration of surgery [MD - 15.09 (95% CI - 35.38, 5.20; p = 0.15)], functional outcome, and incision length.

Conclusion: The pararectus approach offers an advantage with lesser operative blood loss and shorter hospital stay, whilst MSA stands out with better reduction quality and radiological outcomes. Nevertheless, both approaches exhibit no difference in complication rates, duration of surgery, incision length, and functional outcome. Hence, the pararectus approach can be considered an alternative to MSA; however, the existing literature fails to demonstrate a distinct advantage over MSA.

Keywords: Acetabulum fracture; Meta-analysis; Modified Stoppa; Pararectus approach; Stoppa approach.

Publication types

Review