Comparison of intramedullary fixation and arthroplasty for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures in the elderly: A meta-analysis

More and more studies conduct to compare intramedullary fixation (IMF) with arthroplasty in treating intertrochanteric hip fractures, but it remains controversy. The aim of this meta-analysis was to find out whether IMF or arthroplasty was more appropriate for treating intertrochanteric hip fracture...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Medicine (Baltimore) 2017-07, Vol.96 (27), p.e7446-e7446
Main Authors: Nie, Boyuan, Wu, Dou, Yang, Zhaohui, Liu, Qiang
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip
Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary
Hip Fractures - surgery
Humans
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:More and more studies conduct to compare intramedullary fixation (IMF) with arthroplasty in treating intertrochanteric hip fractures, but it remains controversy. The aim of this meta-analysis was to find out whether IMF or arthroplasty was more appropriate for treating intertrochanteric hip fractures in elderly patients. Relevant studies were searched in the electronic databases of PubMed, Embase, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1980 to September 2016 with English language restriction. Surgical information and postoperative outcomes were analyzed using RevMan 5.3 version. A total of 1239 patients from 11 studies which satisfied the eligibility criteria were included. Compared with IMF, the use of arthroplasty reduced implant-related complications (odds ratio [OR]: 2.05, P = .02) and reoperation rate (OR: 7.06, P 
ISSN:0025-7974
1536-5964
DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000007446