Treatment of posterior malleolar fracture with plate or screw fixation is still controversial. Plate fixation is considered to have better stability but more soft tissue damage; screw fixation is less invasive and may yields lesser blood loss and surgery time. We conducted this meta-analysis to explore intraoperative and postoperative efficacy between plate and screw fixation in posterior malleolar fractured patients.
PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, Scopus and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure databases were searched in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Random-effects model and 95% confidence intervals was used. The outcomes of interest were surgery time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS), bone healing time, full weight bearing time, off bed ambulation time, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), complication rate, and rate of use of syndesmosis screw etc. RESULTS: One randomized clinical trial and fifty-two retrospective cohort studies with a total of 3757 patients (1956 in screw group and 1801 in plate group) were included in the systematic review. Compared to screw group, plate group yielded significantly longer surgery time, more intraoperative blood loss, but shorter length of hospital stay, better AOFAS, better Baird Jackson score, better AOFAS and Baird Jackson excellent-good rate, shorter bone healing time, shorter time enabling full weight bearing, shorter time enabling off bed ambulation, lesser postoperative pain, lesser complication rate, lesser loosening rate, lesser malunion rate, and lesser postoperative osteoarthritis.
Plate fixation is a favorable alternative to screw fixation in posterior malleolar fractured patients. Although plate fixation was at risk of longer surgery time and more blood loss, it provided better postoperative functional outcome, shorter healing, weight bearing and off bed ambulation time and lesser pain compared to screw fixation.

Papers