Cargando…
Functional Outcome & Revision Rate Of Pfna Vs Dhs For Osteoporotic Intertrochanteric Femur Fracture: A Meta Analysis
OBJECTIVES: Intertrochanteric femur fracture in elderly presents a challenge as the source of morbidity and mortality if not well-treated. This study investigates the functional outcome and revision rate of two of the most common treatments of choice for this condition, Proximal Femoral Nail Antirot...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7262865/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120S00030 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVES: Intertrochanteric femur fracture in elderly presents a challenge as the source of morbidity and mortality if not well-treated. This study investigates the functional outcome and revision rate of two of the most common treatments of choice for this condition, Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation (PFNA) and Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS), while furthermore investigate the secondary functional outcome of the two procedures if proceeded to Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty (CTHA). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted to identify relevant studies through PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane database. A total of 9 studies (2.251 patients) were included, divided into 3 meta-analysis. Random effect model was used for continuous outcomes using Review Manager. RESULTS: For primary Harris Hip Score (HHS), the mean HHS at 12-months follow-up for PFNA (n = 184) was 77.77, as for DHS (n = 187) was 78.33, indicating no significant difference (P = 0.73). The mean revision rates for PFNA (n=784) was 2.68%, as for DHS (n=766) was 2.48%, indicating no significant difference (P = 0.61). For secondary HHS after CTHA, the mean HHS 12-months postoperatively for PFNA (n =142) was 83.97, as for DHS (n = 190) was 83.65, indicating no significant difference (P = 0.59). DISCUSSION: PFNA and DHS can both be considered in osteoporotic intertrochanter femur fracture, as the two procedures offer similar 1-year functional outcome and revision rate. However, PFNA may benefit with less blood loss and operation time. Some potential revision causes, such as peri-implant femoral fracture, infection, and implant failure should always be monitored perioperatively. Furthermore, when CTHA is indicated for revision, the two procedures offer comparable secondary functional outcome. CONCLUSION: Current meta-analysis suggests that PFNA and DHS both have comparable primary functional outcome, revision rate, and post-CTHA secondary functional outcome. |
---|