Factors influencing the incidence of reoperation after femoral neck fractures

Surgical interventions for treating intracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a considerable challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is rising rapidly. The majority of intracapsular hip fractures are treated surgically.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects (benefits and harms) of all surgical treatments used in the management of intracapsular hip fractures in older adults, using a network meta-analysis of randomised trials, and to generate a hierarchy of interventions according to their outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and five other databases in July 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, reference lists of retrieved articles and conducted backward-citation searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing different treatments for fragility intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. We included total hip arthroplasties (THAs), hemiarthroplasties (HAs), internal fixation, and non-operative treatments. We excluded studies of people with hip fracture with specific pathologies other than osteoporosis or resulting from high-energy trauma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. One review author completed data extraction which was checked by a second review author. We collected data for three outcomes at different time points: mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) - both reported within 4 months, at 12 months, and after 24 months of surgery, and unplanned return to theatre (at end of study follow-up). We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) with Stata software, using frequentist methods, and calculated the differences between treatments using risk ratios (RRs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also performed direct comparisons using the same codes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 119 studies (102 RCTS, 17 quasi-RCTs) with 17,653 participants with 17,669 intracapsular fractures in the review; 83% of fractures were displaced. The mean participant age ranged from 60 to 87 years and 73% were women.  After discussion with clinical experts, we selected 12 nodes that represented the best balance between clinical plausibility and efficiency of the networks: cemented modern unipolar HA, dynamic fixed angle plate, uncemented first-generation bipolar HA, uncemented modern bipolar HA, cemented modern bipolar HA, uncemented first-generation unipolar HA, uncemented modern unipolar HA, THA with single articulation, dual-mobility THA, pins, screws, and non-operative treatment. Seventy-five studies (with 11,855 participants) with data for at least two of these treatments contributed to the NMA. We selected cemented modern unipolar HA as a reference treatment against which other treatments were compared. This was a common treatment in the networks, providing a clinically appropriate comparison. In order to provide a concise summary of the results, we report only network estimates when there was evidence of difference between treatments. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for serious and very serious risks of bias and when estimates included possible transitivity, particularly for internal fixation which included more undisplaced fractures. We also downgraded for incoherence, or inconsistency in indirect estimates, although this affected few estimates. Most estimates included the possibility of benefits and harms, and we downgraded the evidence for these treatments for imprecision.  We found that cemented modern unipolar HA, dynamic fixed angle plate and pins seemed to have the greatest likelihood of reducing mortality at 12 months. Overall, 23.5% of participants who received the reference treatment died within 12 months of surgery. Uncemented modern bipolar HA had higher mortality than the reference treatment (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.85; derived only from indirect evidence; low-certainty evidence), and THA with single articulation also had higher mortality (network estimate RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.32; derived from direct evidence from 2 studies with 225 participants, and indirect evidence; very low-certainty evidence). In the remaining treatments, the certainty of the evidence ranged from low to very low, and we noted no evidence of any differences in mortality at 12 months.  We found that THA (single articulation), cemented modern bipolar HA and uncemented modern bipolar HA seemed to have the greatest likelihood of improving HRQoL at 12 months. This network was comparatively sparse compared to other outcomes and the certainty of the evidence of differences between treatments was very low. We noted no evidence of any differences in HRQoL at 12 months, although estimates were imprecise. We found that arthroplasty treatments seemed to have a greater likelihood of reducing unplanned return to theatre than internal fixation and non-operative treatment. We estimated that 4.3% of participants who received the reference treatment returned to theatre during the study follow-up. Compared to this treatment, we found low-certainty evidence that more participants returned to theatre if they were treated with a dynamic fixed angle plate (network estimate RR 4.63, 95% CI 2.94 to 7.30; from direct evidence from 1 study with 190 participants, and indirect evidence). We found very low-certainty evidence that more participants returned to theatre when treated with pins (RR 4.16, 95% CI 2.53 to 6.84; only from indirect evidence), screws (network estimate RR 5.04, 95% CI 3.25 to 7.82; from direct evidence from 2 studies with 278 participants, and indirect evidence), and non-operative treatment (RR 5.41, 95% CI 1.80 to 16.26; only from indirect evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence of a tendency for an increased risk of unplanned return to theatre for all of the arthroplasty treatments, and in particular for THA, compared with cemented modern unipolar HA, with little evidence to suggest the size of this difference varied strongly between the arthroplasty treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was considerable variability in the ranking of each treatment such that there was no one outstanding, or subset of outstanding, superior treatments. However, cemented modern arthroplasties tended to more often yield better outcomes than alternative treatments and may be a more successful approach than internal fixation. There is no evidence of a difference between THA (single articulation) and cemented modern unipolar HA in the outcomes measured in this review. THA may be an appropriate treatment for a subset of people with intracapsular fracture but we have not explored this further.

Internal fixation implants for intracapsular hip fractures in older adults

BACKGROUND

Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a huge challenge and burden to patients, healthcare systems and society. The increased proportion of older adults in the world population means that the absolute number of hip fractures is rising rapidly across the globe. The majority of hip fractures are treated surgically. This review evaluates evidence for types of internal fixation implants used in joint-preserving surgery for intracapsular hip fractures.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effects (benefits and harms) of different implants for the internal fixation of intracapsular hip fractures in older adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Epistemonikos, Proquest Dissertations and Theses, and National Technical Information Service in July 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, reference lists of retrieved articles and conducted backward-citation searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing implants used for internal fixation of fragility intracapsular proximal femoral fractures in older adults. Types of implants were smooth pins (these include pins with fold-out hooks), screws, or fixed angle plates. We excluded studies in which all or most fractures were caused by specific pathologies other than osteoporosis or were the result of a high energy trauma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. One review author extracted data and assessed risk of bias which was checked by a second review author. We collected data for seven outcomes: activities of daily living (ADL), delirium, functional status, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), mobility, mortality (reported within four months of surgery as early mortality, and at 12 months since surgery), and unplanned return to theatre for treating a complication resulting directly or indirectly from the primary procedure (such as deep infection or non-union). We assessed the certainty of the evidence for these outcomes using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 studies (32 RCTs, six quasi-RCTs) with 8585 participants with 8590 intracapsular fractures. The mean ages of participants in the studies ranged from 60 to 84 years; 73% were women, and 38% of fractures were undisplaced. We report here the findings of the four main comparisons, which were between different categories of implants. We downgraded the certainty of the outcomes for imprecision (when data were available from insufficient numbers of participants or the confidence interval (CI) was wide), study limitations (e.g. high or unclear risks of bias), and inconsistency (when we noted substantial levels of statistical heterogeneity). Smooth pins versus fixed angle plate (four studies, 1313 participants) We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two implant types in independent mobility with no more than one walking stick (1 study, 112 participants), early mortality (1 study, 383 participants), mortality at 12 months (2 studies, 661 participants), and unplanned return to theatre (3 studies, 736 participants). No studies reported on ADL, delirium, functional status, or HRQoL. Screws versus fixed angle plates (11 studies, 2471 participants) We found low-certainty evidence of no clinically important differences between the two implant types in functional status using WOMAC (MD -3.18, 95% CI -6.35 to -0.01; 2 studies, 498 participants; range of scores from 0 to 96, lower values indicate better function), and HRQoL using EQ-5D (MD 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.06; 2 studies, 521 participants; range -0.654 (worst), 0 (dead), 1 (best)). We also found low-certainty evidence showing little or no difference between the two implant types in mortality at 12 months (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.31; 7 studies, 1690 participants), and unplanned return to theatre (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.26; 11 studies, 2321 participants). We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two implant types in independent mobility (1 study, 70 participants), and early mortality (3 studies, 467 participants). No studies reported on ADL or delirium. Screws versus smooth pins (seven studies, 1119 participants) We found low-certainty evidence of no or little difference between the two implant types in mortality at 12 months (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.35; 6 studies, 1005 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two implant types in early mortality (3 studies, 584 participants) and unplanned return to theatre (5 studies, 862 participants). No studies reported on ADL, delirium, functional status, HRQoL, or mobility. Screws or smooth pins versus fixed angle plates (15 studies, 3784 participants) In this comparison, we combined data from the first two comparison groups. We found low-certainty evidence of no or little difference between the two groups of implants in mortality at 12 months (RR 1.04, 95% CI.083 to 1.31; 7 studies, 1690 participants) and unplanned return to theatre (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18; 14 studies, 3057 participants). We found very low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between the two groups of implants in independent mobility (2 studies, 182 participants), and early mortality (4 studies, 850 participants). We found no additional evidence to support the findings for functional status or HRQoL as reported in 'Screws versus fixed angle plates'. No studies reported ADL or delirium.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-certainty evidence that there may be little or no difference between screws and fixed angle plates in functional status, HRQoL, mortality at 12 months, or unplanned return to theatre; and between screws and pins in mortality at 12 months. The limited and very low-certainty evidence for the outcomes for which data were available for the smooth pins versus fixed angle plates comparison, as well as the other outcomes for which data were available for the screws and fixed angle plates, and screws and pins comparisons means we have very little confidence in the estimates of effect for these outcomes. Additional RCTs would increase the certainty of the evidence. We encourage such studies to report outcomes consistent with the core outcome set for hip fracture, including long-term quality of life indicators such as ADL and mobility.

Surgical approaches and ancillary techniques for internal fixation of intracapsular proximal femoral fractures

BACKGROUND

In the fixation of intracapsular hip fractures, different implants, surgical approaches and ancillary manoeuvres have been employed to improve the reduction, and the stability of the reconstruction, in an attempt to reduce the frequency of non-union and aseptic necrosis of the femoral head.

OBJECTIVES

To compare alternative surgical approaches and ancillary techniques in internal fixation of intracapsular hip fractures which have been subjected to randomised and quasi-randomised trials in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, and reference lists of relevant articles were searched. Date of the most recent search: November 2004.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and quasi-randomised trials investigating operative technique for the treatment of intracapsular hip fractures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality, by use of a 10 item checklist, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

One trial with 103 participants studied the effect of impaction of the fracture at the time of surgery. The only outcome measure reported was bone scintimetry. There was some evidence that impaction, particularly of displaced fractures, resulted in a reduction of blood flow to the femoral head as assessed by bone scintimetry. One quasi-randomised trial with 220 participants compared compression of the fracture with no compression. Results for 156 individuals at one year showed a tendency to a lower incidence of non-union for those fractures treated without compression.Two trials, one involving 102 young adults under 50 years old and the other involving 49 older people aged 65 years or over, compared open versus closed reduction of the fracture. Both found open reduction significantly increased length of surgery. None of the other differences between open and closed reduction in the outcomes reported by the two trials were statistically significant.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Insufficient evidence exists from randomised trials to confirm the relative effects of open versus closed reduction of intracapsular fractures, or the effects of intra-operative impaction or compression of an intracapsular fracture treated by internal fixation.

Treatment strategies for proximal femur fractures in osteoporotic patients

Fractures of the proximal end of the femur, together with vertebral fractures, are greatly exacerbated by osteoporosis and can be regarded as the most typical and most serious complications of this disease. The demand for prompt mobilisation with full loading of the affected limb, combined with a desire for the gentlest of treatments, becomes increasingly difficult to meet in ageing patients with advanced osteoporosis. The advantages of osteosynthesis in respect to these demands when operating on elderly patients with fractures do not apply due to the inability of the osteoporotic bone to hold the osteosynthetic components sufficiently until fracture healing occurs. This inability is related to the anatomy of the proximal end of the femur and its loading patterns. Under eccentric loading, high bending loads occur, leading to failure of the osteosynthetic anchorage at the center of the femoral head. This leads subsequently to stressful revision operations for the patient. The prosthetic replacement is a good option in cases of dislocated intracapsular fractures, but in cases of trochanteric fractures it is still debated. Therefore, it is vital for the trauma surgeon to have specific knowledge of the patient's bone quality in order to optimise the result of the preferred procedure. With reference to our own experimental research and a study of the current literature, this knowledge can be summarised as follows: the most stable anchorage for the implant is achieved by placing the implant through the midpoint of the femoral head (highest bone mineral density) or just below ("best backing"). Anchoring femoral head implants so that they are stable in rotation within the head-neck fragment will significantly raise their load bearing capacity. This is also true for intramedullary load bearing devices in trochanteric fractures. The distance between the load-bearing device in the femoral neck and the articular surface is inversely correlated to the stability at yield, as other studies have already shown. There seems to be a limit for a successful realisation of an osteosynthesis that lies at a femoral head bone mineral density of 250 mg/cm(3) calcium-hydroxyapatite (CaHAp). Nevertheless, high precision surgery in regard to fracture reduction and implant placement is a essential requirement for a successful osteosynthesis. Reproducible local measurements of bone mineral density and trabecular alterations, as well as quick screening methods, are very much desired by the authors.

Internal fixation implants for intracapsular proximal femoral fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

Numerous different implants with screws, pins and side plates have been used for the internal fixation of intracapsular hip fractures.

OBJECTIVES

To determine from randomised trials which implant is superior for the internal fixation of intracapsular proximal femoral fractures.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register. The date of the most recent search was December 2000.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing different implants for the internal fixation of intracapsular hip fractures in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality, by use of a ten item scale, and extracted data. Additional information was sought from trialists. After grouping by implant type, comparable groups of trials were subgrouped and where appropriate, data were pooled using the fixed effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies involving 5269 participants (5274 fractures) were included in the study. Considerable variation in the quality of methodology between studies was found and biases due to familiarity with some of the implants were noted. None of the implants tested were found to be significantly superior for any of the outcome measures related to fracture healing complications or mortality. The sliding hip screw was found to take longer to insert and to have an increased operative blood loss compared with multiple screws or pins.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

No clear conclusions can be made on the choice of implant for internal fixation of intracapsular fractures from the available evidence within randomised trials.

Choice of implant for internal fixation of femoral neck fractures. Meta-analysis of 25 randomised trials including 4,925 patients

We reviewed all randomised trials comparing different implants for treating intracapsular fractures of the hip and, where possible, the data were combined. 25 randomised trials were identified involving 4,925 patients. Screws appeared to be superior to pins. It was not possible to determine the optimum number or type of screws. No advantage was shown for an implant with a side-plate.