Cargando…

Cephalo-medullary nailing versus dynamic hip screw with trochanteric stabilisation plate for the treatment of unstable per-trochanteric hip fractures: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The use of cephalo-medullary nails (CMN) is a widely accepted management option for the treatment of unstable per-trochanteric hip fractures. A growing body of literature has reported good functional and radiological outcomes in patients managed with a dynamic hip screw supplemented with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Selim, Amr, Ponugoti, Nikhil, Naqvi, Ali Zain, Magill, Henry
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7802196/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33430910
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-02193-5
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The use of cephalo-medullary nails (CMN) is a widely accepted management option for the treatment of unstable per-trochanteric hip fractures. A growing body of literature has reported good functional and radiological outcomes in patients managed with a dynamic hip screw supplemented with a trochanteric stabilisation plate (DHS w/ TSP). However, a robust meta-analysis does not exist in the current literature comparing the two fixation methods. PURPOSES: Management of these kinds of injuries is very challenging in orthopaedic practice, yet no strong evidence is in place to delineate which implant gives the best results. This meta-analysis is the first to determine the efficacy of CMN versus DHS w/ TSP. METHODS: An up-to-date literature search was performed using a predetermined search strategy and eligibility criteria. All suitable literature was appraised for methodological quality using the Cochrane’s collaboration tool. Hospital stay, operative time, intra-operative complication rate, mechanical failure rate, infection rates, revision rates and functional outcomes were all considered. RESULTS: A total of five studies were included in the meta-analysis. The results of this analysis suggest that CMN is only associated with lower revision rates when compared to DHS w/ TSP; however, no significant difference was found in terms of hospital stay, operative time, blood transfusion, complications rate and functional outcome. CONCLUSION: Both CMN and DHS w/TSP proved to be reliable in the management of unstable per-trochanteric fractures; however, more extensive datasets are required to draw robust conclusions.