Cargando…

Proximal femoral nail anti‐rotation vs dynamic hip screws decrease the incidence of surgical site infections in patients with intertrochanteric fractures: A meta‐analysis

In this study, a meta‐analysis was conducted to comprehensively analyse the effectiveness of using proximal femoral nail anti‐rotation (PFNA) and dynamic hip screws (DHS) to treat intertrochanteric fractures on postoperative surgical site infections (SSI). PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China Nat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dai, Peijun, Zhou, Huipeng, Mao, Xiaoyu, Liu, Chang, Wang, Zhiwei, Kang, Yifan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10502260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37095692
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.14200
Descripción
Sumario:In this study, a meta‐analysis was conducted to comprehensively analyse the effectiveness of using proximal femoral nail anti‐rotation (PFNA) and dynamic hip screws (DHS) to treat intertrochanteric fractures on postoperative surgical site infections (SSI). PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang databases were searched from their inception until December 2022 to identify studies that compared PFNA and DHS in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. Two investigators independently screened the retrieved studies to assess their quality and verify their eligibility for inclusion. Meta‐analyses were performed with RevMan 5.4 software. Thirty studies, including 3158 patients, met the inclusion criteria. These studies included 1574 patients treated with PFNA, and 1584 were treated with DHS. The findings of the meta‐analysis revealed a significant reduction in the incidence of SSI in patients treated with PFNA compared with those treated with DHS (2.64% vs 6.76%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.40, 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 0.28–0.57, P < .001), superficial SSI (2.58% vs 5.01%, OR: 0.53, 95% CIs: 0.33–0.85, P = .008) and deep SSI (1.26% vs 3.43%, OR: 0.41, 95% CIs: 0.19–0.92, P = .03). PFNA was more effective than DHS in reducing the incidence of SSI. Even so, significant variations in sample sizes among the included studies meant that the methodology for some studies had qualitative deficiencies. Therefore, additional studies with large sample sizes are needed to validate these results.