Literature DB >> 32732709

Total Hip Arthroplasty Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fracture: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Seper Ekhtiari1, Jessica Gormley, Daniel E Axelrod, Tahira Devji, Mohit Bhandari, Gordon H Guyatt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hip fractures are a leading cause of disability worldwide, with displaced femoral neck fractures being of particular concern. A recent meta-analysis reported that total hip arthroplasty (THA) was superior to hemiarthroplasty (HA) in terms of reoperations, but inferior in terms of dislocations. However, publication of 4 additional randomized controlled trials that enrolled nearly 1,780 additional patients merits an updated meta-analysis.
METHODS: We conducted a literature search of 4 databases to identify randomized controlled trials comparing THA and HA in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures. For patient-reported outcomes, the minimally important difference informed calculation of risk differences. We performed a subgroup analysis to address the possible impact of risk of bias and performed meta-regression to assess the possible impact of duration of follow-up.
RESULTS: Sixteen studies that enrolled 3,084 patients randomized to undergo THA (n = 1,521) or HA (n = 1,563) proved eligible. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of the revision rate at up to 5 years of follow-up or functional outcome at up to 3 years. Health-related quality of life was superior in the THA group (mean difference [MD] = 0.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02 to 0.07, minimally important difference, 0.145). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of dislocation or periprosthetic fracture incidence. Operative time was significantly shorter in the HA group (MD = 22 minutes, 95% CI = 9 to 35 minutes). Analyses addressing risk of bias and length of follow-up did not reveal subgroup differences. Certainty of evidence for all outcomes was rated as moderate.
CONCLUSIONS: The best evidence showed, with moderate certainty, that HA and THA likely result in similar revision rate, function, mortality, periprosthetic fracture, and dislocation at up to 5 years, with a small, possibly unimportant benefit in health-related quality of life with THA. More specifically, the improvements are well below established cutoffs for clinical importance. Almost half of all patients were from a single large randomized controlled trial, although the results were consistent across the studies. In addition, HA likely results in a clinically unimportant reduction in operative time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32732709     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.20.00226

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  12 in total

Review 1.  Surgical treatment options for femoral neck fractures in the elderly.

Authors:  Boris A Zelle; Luis M Salazar; Shain L Howard; Kisan Parikh; Hans-Christoph Pape
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-02-21       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Do Dual-mobility Cups Reduce Revision Risk in Femoral Neck Fractures Compared With Conventional THA Designs? An International Meta-analysis of Arthroplasty Registries.

Authors:  John E Farey; James Masters; Alana R Cuthbert; Pernille Iversen; Liza N van Steenbergen; Heather A Prentice; Sam Adie; Adrian Sayers; Michael R Whitehouse; Elizabeth W Paxton; Matthew L Costa; Søren Overgaard; Cecilia Rogmark; Ola Rolfson; Ian A Harris
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 4.755

3.  Global Research Status and Trends of Femoral Neck Fracture Over the Past 27 Years: A Historical Review and Bibliometric Analysis.

Authors:  Peng Peng; Fangjun Xiao; Xiaoming He; Weihua Fang; Jiewen Huang; Bin Wang; Yiwen Luo; Qinwen Zhang; Ying Zhang; Wei He; Qiushi Wei; Mincong He
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-06-14

4.  Internal fixation or hip replacement for undisplaced femoral neck fractures? Pre-fracture health differences reflect survival and functional outcome.

Authors:  Stina Ek; Helen Al-Ani; Katarina Greve; Karin Modig; Margareta Hedström
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2022-07-11       Impact factor: 3.925

5.  Cochrane in CORR®: Arthroplasties for Hip Fractures in Adults.

Authors:  Sofia Bzovsky; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 4.755

6.  Total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture: a protocol for an overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Guilherme Guadagnini Falotico; Vinicius Ynoe Moraes; Fabio Teruo Matsunaga; Marcel Jun Sugawara Tamaoki; Flavio Faloppa; João Carlos Belloti
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  Multivariable Analysis of Risk Factors Affecting Dislocation After Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty in Patients with Femoral Neck Fracture.

Authors:  Yuhui Yang; Guangtao Fu; Qingtian Li; Ruiying Zhang; Weihong Liao; Yuanchen Ma; Qiujian Zheng
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2022-02-09       Impact factor: 2.423

8.  Effect of Psychological Support Therapy on Psychological State, Pain, and Quality of Life of Elderly Patients With Femoral Neck Fracture.

Authors:  Qun Li; Yin Wang; Xiang Shen
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-03-24

9.  Hemiarthroplasty versus total hip arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture in patients older than 80 years: A randomized trial protocol.

Authors:  Lin Peng; Hongyu Liu; Xiaoyi Hu; Jianqiang Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-12-11       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  Epidemiology, classification, treatment, and mortality of adult femoral neck and basicervical fractures: an observational study of 40,049 fractures from the Swedish Fracture Register.

Authors:  Jonas Sundkvist; Anders Brüggeman; Arkan Sayed-Noor; Michael Möller; Olof Wolf; Sebastian Mukka
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-09-15       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.