A comparison of outcomes of locking versus non-locking plate fixation for the distal fibula fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose A locking plate (LP) or non-locking plate (NLP) can be used for distal fibula fracture fixation. However, the advantages of LP over NLP in patients with distal fibula fractures are not clear. In terms of indications, the role of the two plates probably differs; however, to draw comparative conclusions, we conceptualized this systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that directly compared the two plates, wherein both groups’ indications and baseline parameters were similar. Methods An electronic literature search was performed using PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases for studies comparing the LP versus NLP fixation for the lateral malleolus fracture. A total of 18 studies were included in qualitative and quantitative analysis. A subgroup analysis was performed for patients aged < 55 years and patients aged > 55 years. The statistical analysis was performed by Review Manager Software version 5.4.1. Results A meta-analysis of 4243 fractures was performed across 18 studies. The rate of fracture union and overall complication rates did not differ between the two fixation groups with an OR of 0.71 (95% CI 0.26, 1.96, p = 0.51 and 1.11 (95% CI 0.84, 1.47, p = 0.47, respectively. There is no difference in the reoperation rate due to minor or major complications between the two groups. There was no difference in functional outcome (MD −0.85, with 95% CI −5.63, 3.93, p = 0.73), but NLP has a shorter surgical duration (MD 3.0, with 95% CI 0.26, 5.75, p = 0.03). A leave-one-out sensitivity analysis performed for overall complications affected the final outcome of the meta-analysis. Conclusion This meta-analysis demonstrates no clear benefit in selecting LP over NLP for the fixation of lateral malleolus fractures.