Meta-analysis compares arthroscopic versus open reduction for tibial spine fractures in children
A comprehensive meta-analysis examined the efficacy of arthroscopic reduction and internal fixation compared to open reduction for tibial spine fractures in a pediatric population. The study included data from 2017 patients to assess long-term functional outcomes and potential complications associated with each surgical method.
Functional assessments using Lysholm and IKDC scores revealed no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Patients treated arthroscopically achieved IKDC scores averaging 92.07, while those undergoing open surgery scored 92.42. Similarly, Lysholm scores remained comparable, suggesting equivalent restoration of knee function regardless of the surgical approach selected.
Complication analysis showed no significant difference in arthrofibrosis risk between arthroscopic and open techniques. The incidence of residual anterior tibial translation was slightly higher in the arthroscopic group but remained within acceptable clinical limits. Overall, both methods demonstrated safety profiles without reported serious adverse events or discontinuations.
Clinicians can confidently choose between arthroscopic and open reduction based on specific patient needs and surgeon expertise. The evidence supports that minimally invasive techniques offer comparable results to traditional open surgery for this specific fracture type in children.