Table 2 Characteristics of included studies comparing buried versus exposed Kirschner wire osteosynthesis for phalangeal, metacarpal and distal radial fractures
Study | Country | Interventions | Sample size | Follow-up (week) | Study design | For analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AI-Qattan 2008 | Saudi Arabia | Exposed vs Buried | 40/38 | 14 | Retrospective comparative | Infection rate |
Hargreaves 2004 [5] | UK | Exposed vs Buried | 29/27 | 6 | RCT | Infection rate; Kirschner wire removal in operating room; Early pin removal |
Mcquail 2015 [7] | Ireland | Exposed vs Buried | 33/28 | 6 | Retrospective comparative | Infection rate |
Rafique 2006 [19] | Pakistan | Exposed vs Buried | 30/30 | 4 | Retrospective comparative | Infection rate |
Ridley 2017 [6] | USA | Exposed vs Buried | 488/207 | – | Retrospective comparative | Infection rate; Early pin removal |
Terndrup 2018 [9] | Denmark | Exposed vs Buried | 107/337 | 13 | Retrospective comparative | Infection rate; Kirschner wire removal in operating room |
Waheed 2004 [20] | Ireland | Exposed vs Buried | 27/25 | 5.8 | RCT | Kirschner wire removal in operating room |