Cargando…

Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence

The relative effects of internal fixation strategies for intertrochanteric fracture after operation remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to address this important issue. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL for RCTs that compar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yu, Jiajie, Zhang, Chao, Li, Ling, Kwong, Joey S. W., Xue, Li, Zeng, Xiantao, Tang, Li, Li, Youping, Sun, Xin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4676068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26657600
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep18195
_version_ 1782405105930207232
author Yu, Jiajie
Zhang, Chao
Li, Ling
Kwong, Joey S. W.
Xue, Li
Zeng, Xiantao
Tang, Li
Li, Youping
Sun, Xin
author_facet Yu, Jiajie
Zhang, Chao
Li, Ling
Kwong, Joey S. W.
Xue, Li
Zeng, Xiantao
Tang, Li
Li, Youping
Sun, Xin
author_sort Yu, Jiajie
collection PubMed
description The relative effects of internal fixation strategies for intertrochanteric fracture after operation remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to address this important issue. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL for RCTs that compared different internal fixation implants in patients with intertrochanteric fracture at 6-month follow-up or longer. We ultimately included 43 trials enrolling 6911 patients; most trials were small in sample sizes and events. Their risk of bias was generally unclear due to insufficient reporting. Because of these, no statistically significant differences were present from most of the comparisons across all the outcomes, and no definitive conclusions can be made. However, a number of trials compared two commonly used internal fixation strategies, gamma nail (GN) and sliding hip screw (SHS). There is good evidence suggesting that, compared to SHS, GN may increase the risk of cut out (OR = 1.87, 95% CI, 1.08 to 3.21), re-operation (OR = 1.61, 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.53), intra-operative (OR = 3.14, 95% CI, 1.34 to 7.35) and later fractures (OR = 3.67, 95% CI, 1.37 to 9.83). Future randomized trials or observational studies that are carefully designed and conducted are warranted to establish the effects of alternative internal fixation strategies for intertrochanteric fracture.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4676068
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46760682015-12-16 Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence Yu, Jiajie Zhang, Chao Li, Ling Kwong, Joey S. W. Xue, Li Zeng, Xiantao Tang, Li Li, Youping Sun, Xin Sci Rep Article The relative effects of internal fixation strategies for intertrochanteric fracture after operation remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to address this important issue. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL for RCTs that compared different internal fixation implants in patients with intertrochanteric fracture at 6-month follow-up or longer. We ultimately included 43 trials enrolling 6911 patients; most trials were small in sample sizes and events. Their risk of bias was generally unclear due to insufficient reporting. Because of these, no statistically significant differences were present from most of the comparisons across all the outcomes, and no definitive conclusions can be made. However, a number of trials compared two commonly used internal fixation strategies, gamma nail (GN) and sliding hip screw (SHS). There is good evidence suggesting that, compared to SHS, GN may increase the risk of cut out (OR = 1.87, 95% CI, 1.08 to 3.21), re-operation (OR = 1.61, 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.53), intra-operative (OR = 3.14, 95% CI, 1.34 to 7.35) and later fractures (OR = 3.67, 95% CI, 1.37 to 9.83). Future randomized trials or observational studies that are carefully designed and conducted are warranted to establish the effects of alternative internal fixation strategies for intertrochanteric fracture. Nature Publishing Group 2015-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4676068/ /pubmed/26657600 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep18195 Text en Copyright © 2015, Macmillan Publishers Limited http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
spellingShingle Article
Yu, Jiajie
Zhang, Chao
Li, Ling
Kwong, Joey S. W.
Xue, Li
Zeng, Xiantao
Tang, Li
Li, Youping
Sun, Xin
Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence
title Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence
title_full Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence
title_fullStr Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence
title_full_unstemmed Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence
title_short Internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence
title_sort internal fixation treatments for intertrochanteric fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized evidence
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4676068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26657600
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep18195
work_keys_str_mv AT yujiajie internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT zhangchao internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT liling internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT kwongjoeysw internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT xueli internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT zengxiantao internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT tangli internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT liyouping internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence
AT sunxin internalfixationtreatmentsforintertrochantericfractureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedevidence