ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy of percutaneous cannulated screw (PCS) versus plate fixation (PF) in the treatment of ankle fractures. MethodsThe Cochrane Library (Issue 5, 2014), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data were searched up to May 28th 2014, for studies concerning the efficacy of percutaneous cannulated screw versus plate fixation for ankle fractures. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.1 software. Result A total of 10 studies (3 RCTs and 7 CCTs) involving 627 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that:compared with the PF group, the PCS group was superior in time of the operation (RCT:MD=-6.78, 95%CI -11.95 to -1.60, P=0.01; CCT:MD=-9.76, 95%CI -13.68 to -5.84, P<0.000 01), blood loss during the operation (RCT:MD=-36.14, 95%CI -40.02 to -32.17, P<0.000 01; CCT:MD=-34.80, 95%CI -37.78 to -31.81, P<0.000 01) and the time of the fracture healing (RCT:MD=-1.16, 95%CI -1.51 to -0.81, P<0.000 01; CCT:MD=-1.55, 95%CI -2.97 to -0.13, P=0.03); However, there were no statistical differences between the two groups in complication rate (CCT:OR=0.48, 95%CI 0.08 to 2.81, P=0.41), AOFAS score excellent rate (RCT:OR=2.11, 95%CI 0.81 to 5.49, P=0.12; CCT:OR=1.58, 95%CI 0.75 to 3.30, P=0.23), and postoperative malleolus pain rate (CCT:OR=0.68, 95%CI 0.00 to 148.82, P=0.89). ConclusionCurrent evidence shows that PCS is superior to PF in shorting time of the operation, reducing blood loss during the operation, and shorting time of the fracture healing. However, the complication rate, AOFAS score excellent rate, and postoperative malleolus pain rate are similar for each operation. Due to the quality limitation of the CCTs, the conclusion are needed to be verified by more high quality RCTs in future.