Periprosthetic bone loss following hemiarthroplasty: a comparison between cemented and cementless hip prosthesis

Effect of cemented vs uncemented on outcomes for hemiarthroplasty in the elderly: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

In patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty in the elderly, the choice of the cemented method remains controversial. This meta-analysis was undertaken to compare the impact of cemented vs uncemented on outcomes for hemiarthroplasty in the elderly.

METHODS

This study included randomized controlled trials comparing the postoperative effects of cemented vs uncemented in patients with hemiarthroplasty. With no language restrictions, we searched Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Collaboration), Clinical Trials.gov, the ISRCTN registry, as well as gray literature with no language restrictions from January 1966 to April 2023. Data were quantitatively summarized using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was 1-year mortality.

RESULTS

This study included 13 randomized controlled trials with 3485 patients. The primary outcomes of the meta-analysis showed that cemented fixation in elderly patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty was superior to noncemented in 1-year mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77, 0.97). Moreover, cemented was associated with a reduced risk of intraoperative periprosthetic fracture (RR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.50), postoperative periprosthetic fracture (RR = 0.34, 95% CI: 0.16,0.72), and loosening (RR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Cemented hemiarthroplasty is superior to noncemented in terms of survival. Moreover, cementation reduces the incidence of some implant-related complications. More extensive trials are needed to provide adequate guidance for choosing the proper cemented method.

Unplanned emergency department visits within 90 days of hip hemiarthroplasty for osteoporotic femoral neck fractures: Reasons, risks, and mortalities

Objectives

Bipolar hemiarthroplasty is commonly performed to treat displaced femoral neck fractures in osteoporotic patients. This study aimed to assess the occurrence and outcomes of unplanned return visits to the emergency department (ED) within 90 days following bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures.

Methods

The clinical data of 1322 consecutive patients who underwent bipolar hemiarthroplasty for osteoporotic femoral neck fractures at a tertiary medical center were analyzed. Data from the patients' electronic medical records, including demographic information, comorbidities, and operative details, were collected. The risk factors and mortality rates were analyzed.

Results

Within 90 days after surgery, 19.9% of patients returned to the ED. Surgery-related reasons accounted for 20.2% of the patient's returns. Older age, a high Charlson comorbidity index score, chronic kidney disease, and a history of cancer were identified as significant risk factors for unplanned ED visits. Patients with uncemented implants had a significantly greater risk of returning to the ED due to periprosthetic fractures than did those with cemented implants (P = 0.04). Patients who returned to the ED within 90 days had an almost fivefold greater 1-year mortality rate (15.2% vs 3.1%, P < 0.001) and a greater overall mortality rate (26.2% vs 10.5%, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study highlights the importance of identifying risk factors for unplanned ED visits after bipolar hemiarthroplasty, which may contribute to a better prognosis. Consideration should be given to the use of cemented implants for hemiarthroplasty, as uncemented implants are associated with a greater risk of periprosthetic fractures.

Cemented vs Uncemented hemiarthroplasties for femoral neck fractures: An overlapping systematic review and evidence appraisal

BACKGROUND

The purpose of our study is to assess the methodology of overlapping systematic reviews related to cemented vs uncemented hip hemiarthroplasties for the treatment of femoral neck fractures to find the study with the best evidence. Also, we assess the gaps in methodology and information to help with direction of future studies.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in September 2022 using Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Clinical outcome data and characteristics of each study were extracted to see which treatment had better favorability. The outcomes and characteristics extracted from each study includes, first author, search date, publication journal and date, number of studies included, databases, level of evidence, software used, subgroup analyses that were conducted, and heterogeneity with the use of I2 statistics Methodological quality information was extracted from each study using four different methodologic scores (Oxford Levels of Evidence; Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR); Quality of reporting of meta-analyses (QUROM); Oxman and Guyatt. After that, the Jadad decision algorithm was used to identify which studies in our sample contained the best available evidence. Finally, overlap of each systematic review was assessed using Corrected Covered Area (CCA) to look at redundancy and research waste among the systematic reviews published on the topic.

RESULTS

After screening, 12 studies were included in our sample. For the Oxford Levels of Evidence, we found that all the studies were Level I evidence. For the QUORUM assessment, we had 1 study with the highest score of 18. Additionally, we did the Oxman and Guyatt assessment, where we found 4 studies with a maximum score of 6. Finally, we did an AMSTAR assessment and found 2 studies with a score of 9. After conducting the methodological scores; the authors determined that Li. L et al 2021 had the highest quality. In addition, it was found that the CCA found among the primary studies in each systematic review calculated to .22. Any CCA above .15 is considered "very high overlap".

CONCLUSIONS

The best available evidence suggests that Cemented HAs are better at preventing Prosthesis-related complications. Conversely, the best evidence also suggests that Cemented HA also results in longer operative time and increased intraoperative blood loss. When conducting future systematic reviews related to the topic, we ask that authors restrict conducting another systematic review until new evidence emerges so as not to confuse the clinical decision-making of physicians.

Hip replacement in femoral neck fractures: the role of cementation and its technical difficulties

Hip fractures in elderly patients are an arising problem due to aging of population and still represent a controversial challenge for orthopedic surgeon who should help achieve the best functional recovery in the shortest time. Cementation in hip replacement plays an important role, but it should be carefully planned considering the possible risks. According to the literature, there are still no certainties regarding the superiority of an uncemented implant compared to a cemented one. The purpose of this work is to conduct an overview of the scientific literature that can clarify the advantages and disadvantages of cemented and non-cemented implants from a biological and biomechanical point of view.

Analysis of Bone Loss around Cemented and Biologic Prostheses after Hemiarthroplasty

Objective. To perform hemiarthroplasty (HA) on elderly patients with femoral neck fractures using cemented and biologic prostheses and then compare the bone loss around the two types of prostheses after surgery. Methods. A total of 60 patients aged over 75 years (with a mean age of 83.5 years) and suffering from femoral neck fracture (Garden types III and IV) from January 2018 to December 2020 were selected; they were randomly divided into group A ( $n=30$ , cemented prostheses) and group B ( $n=30$ , biologic prostheses) and received HA. At 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery, Harris Hip Scale (HHS) was adopted for patient evaluation, and patients’ bone mineral density (BMD) of the 7 Gruen zones around the prostheses was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA scan). Results. Both groups achieved satisfactory results postoperatively, and the Harris scores of the hips increased gradually over time, which were better in group A than in group B. Gruen zones in group A showed a slower trend of decreasing BMD than group B, and the differences were significant at zones 2, 3, and 4 ( $P<0.05$ ). Conclusion. For elderly patients with femoral neck fractures, selecting cemented prosthesis for HA better recovers the hip function and has a low rate of bone loss around the prosthesis.

Mortality associated with cemented and uncemented fixation of hemiarthroplasty and total hip replacement in the surgical management of intracapsular hip fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of bone cement for implant fixation in the surgical management of intracapsular hip fractures (IHFs) remains controversial. Although UK national guidance supports cementation, many surgeons remain cautious of its use. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate evidence surrounding post-operative mortality associated with cemented and uncemented total hip replacement and hemiarthroplasty implants.

METHODS

We conducted a search of MEDLINE and Embase databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from commencement until 17 June 2020. Articles reporting mortality or patient survival as an outcome following total hip replacement (THR) or hemiarthroplasty (HA) to manage IHFs were included. Articles not comparing cemented and uncemented fixation were excluded. A meta-analysis on mortality stratified by post-operative follow-up period was conducted using a fixed-effects model. The Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was used to assess risk of bias.

RESULTS

Our initial search found 77 references, 13 of which were eligible for full-text review. Mortality data from 12 studies were pooled and included in the meta-analysis. 1 599 operations were reported: 882 involved cemented fixation; 717, uncemented. Mortality outcome reporting ranged from less than 7 days to 5 years post-operation. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in mortality at any follow-up period. Study quality assessment revealed low certainty in mortality estimates.

CONCLUSION

Existing evidence indicates that cementation has no effect on mortality at any reported follow-up time period. Even with the use of evidence synthesis, the sample size remains relatively low for mortality outcomes and insufficiently powered to reliably determine differences between groups.

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.

Arthroplasties for hip fracture in adults

BACKGROUND

Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a huge challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is rising rapidly. The majority of hip fractures are treated surgically. This review evaluates evidence for types of arthroplasty: hemiarthroplasties (HAs), which replace part of the hip joint; and total hip arthroplasties (THAs), which replace all of it.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of different designs, articulations, and fixation techniques of arthroplasties for treating hip fractures in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, seven other databases and one trials register in July 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing different arthroplasties for treating fragility intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. We included THAs and HAs inserted with or without cement, and comparisons between different articulations, sizes, and types of prostheses. We excluded studies of people with specific pathologies other than osteoporosis and with hip fractures resulting from high-energy trauma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for seven outcomes: activities of daily living, functional status, health-related quality of life, mobility (all early: within four months of surgery), early mortality and at 12 months after surgery, delirium, and unplanned return to theatre at the end of follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 58 studies (50 RCTs, 8 quasi-RCTs) with 10,654 participants with 10,662 fractures. All studies reported intracapsular fractures, except one study of extracapsular fractures. The mean age of participants in the studies ranged from 63 years to 87 years, and 71% were women. We report here the findings of three comparisons that represent the most substantial body of evidence in the review. Other comparisons were also reported, but with many fewer participants. All studies had unclear risks of bias in at least one domain and were at high risk of detection bias. We downgraded the certainty of many outcomes for imprecision, and for risks of bias where sensitivity analysis indicated that bias sometimes influenced the size or direction of the effect estimate. HA: cemented versus uncemented (17 studies, 3644 participants) There was moderate-certainty evidence of a benefit with cemented HA consistent with clinically small to large differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.34; 3 studies, 1122 participants), and reduction in the risk of mortality at 12 months (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96; 15 studies, 3727 participants). We found moderate-certainty evidence of little or no difference in performance of activities of daily living (ADL) (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.16; 4 studies, 1275 participants), and independent mobility (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14; 3 studies, 980 participants). We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference in delirium (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.06; 2 studies, 800 participants), early mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.13; 12 studies, 3136 participants) or unplanned return to theatre (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; 6 studies, 2336 participants). For functional status, there was very low-certainty evidence showing no clinically important differences. The risks of most adverse events were similar. However, cemented HAs led to less periprosthetic fractures intraoperatively (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.46; 7 studies, 1669 participants) and postoperatively (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 6 studies, 2819 participants), but had a higher risk of pulmonary embolus (RR 3.56, 95% CI 1.26 to 10.11, 6 studies, 2499 participants). Bipolar HA versus unipolar HA (13 studies, 1499 participants) We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between bipolar and unipolar HAs in early mortality (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.64; 4 studies, 573 participants) and 12-month mortality (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.53; 8 studies, 839 participants). We are unsure of the effect for delirium, HRQoL, and unplanned return to theatre, which all indicated little or no difference between articulation, because the certainty of the evidence was very low. No studies reported on early ADL, functional status and mobility. The overall risk of adverse events was similar. The absolute risk of dislocation was low (approximately 1.6%) and there was no evidence of any difference between treatments. THA versus HA (17 studies, 3232 participants) The difference in the risk of mortality at 12 months was consistent with clinically relevant benefits and harms (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.22; 11 studies, 2667 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in unplanned return to theatre, but this effect estimate includes clinically relevant benefits of THA (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.07, favours THA; 10 studies, 2594 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between THA and HA in delirium (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; 2 studies, 357 participants), and mobility (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.16, favours THA; 1 study, 83 participants). We are unsure of the effect for early functional status, ADL, HRQoL, and mortality, which indicated little or no difference between interventions, because the certainty of the evidence was very low.  The overall risks of adverse events were similar. There was an increased risk of dislocation with THA (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.27; 12 studies, 2719 participants) and no evidence of a difference in deep infection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For people undergoing HA for intracapsular hip fracture, it is likely that a cemented prosthesis will yield an improved global outcome, particularly in terms of HRQoL and mortality. There is no evidence to suggest a bipolar HA is superior to a unipolar prosthesis. Any benefit of THA compared with hemiarthroplasty is likely to be small and not clinically appreciable. We encourage researchers to focus on alternative implants in current clinical practice, such as dual-mobility bearings, for which there is limited available evidence.

Cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cemented hemiarthroplasty to treat femoral neck fractures (FNFs) in elderly patients is controversial. Therefore, this study aimed to compare cemented vs uncemented outcomes.

METHODS

A literature review using Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index databases was conducted. Studies comparing outcomes of cemented with uncemented hemiarthroplasty for FNFs in elderly patients up to March 2020 were included. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled and reported as relative risk (RR) or odds ratio (ORs), while continuous outcomes were pooled and reported as the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD).

RESULTS

The analysis included 39 studies with a total of 112 576 patients. Pooled analysis revealed that compared with cemented, patients with uncemented intervention had better outcomes for intraoperative blood loss (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.01-0.37), systolic blood pressure (OR 2.83; 95% CI 1.51-5.28), surgery duration (SMD, 0.51; 95% CI 0.2-0.81), length of anesthesia (OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.11-0.45), 6-month mortality (OR 1.11; 95% CI 1.03-1.2), cardiovascular accidents (OR 2.14; 95% CI 1.07-4.28), respiratory failure (OR 8.26; 95% CI 1.38-49.4), fat embolisms (OR 1.58; 95% CI 1.29-1.93), and heterotrophic ossification (OR 2.3; 95% CI 1.3-4.06), but more intraoperative accidents (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.26-0.45), postoperative fractures (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.21-0.34), reoperations (OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.53-0.65), and revisions (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.44-0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis of hemiarthroplasty outcomes shows that elderly patients who underwent uncemented vs cemented procedures had better results for several factors that are important for not only improved recovery in elderly populations, but also more intraoperative and postoperative risks.

Effectiveness and safety of cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of intracapsular hip fractures

Aims

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the mortality, morbidity, and functional outcomes of cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of intracapsular hip fractures, analyzing contemporary and non-contemporary implants separately.

Methods

PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched to 2 February 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the primary outcome, mortality, and secondary outcomes of function, quality of life, reoperation, postoperative complications, perioperative outcomes, pain, and length of hospital stay. Relative risks (RRs) and mean differences (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)) were used as summary association measures.

Results

A total of 18 studies corresponding to 16 non-overlapping RCTs with a total of 2,819 intracapsular hip fractures were included. Comparing contemporary cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty, RRs (95% CIs) for mortality were 1.32 (0.44 to 3.99) perioperatively, 1.01 (0.48 to 2.10) at 30 days, and 0.90 (0.71 to 1.15) at one year. The use of contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty reduced the risk of intra- and postoperative periprosthetic fracture. There were no significant differences in the risk of other complications, function, pain, and quality of life. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes except for increases in operating time and overall anaesthesia for contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty with mean differences (95% CIs) of 6.67 (2.65 to 10.68) and 4.90 (2.02 to 7.78) minutes, respectively. The morbidity and mortality outcomes were not significantly different between non-contemporary cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty.

Conclusion

There are no differences in the risk of mortality when comparing the use of contemporary cemented with uncemented hemiarthroplasty in the management of intracapsular hip fractures. Contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty is associated with a substantially lower risk of intraoperative and periprosthetic fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1113–1121.

Cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for elderly patients with displaced fracture of the femoral neck: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was performed to incorporate newly published, high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the effects of cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for elderly patients with displaced fracture of the femoral neck.

METHODS

The following electronic databases were extensively searched from the inception of the database through December 2018: EMBASE, Medline, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. RCTs focusing on the outcomes of cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty were reviewed and screened for eligibility. We used the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager Software to perform meta-analyses. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the study quality and bias risk through the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Use fixed effect model or random effect model to pooled data. Cochran's Q statistic was used to evaluate heterogeneity, and I statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs were enrolled (n = 3790) (uncemented hemiarthroplasty group = 1015; cemented hemiarthroplasty group = 1037) (mean age ranged from 70-85.3 years; all patients > 65 years). The meta-analysis showed that cemented hemiarthroplasty has a longer operating time (weighted mean difference, 8.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.83-11.23; P < .00001), less pain (odds ratio, 0.48; 95% CI 4.83-11.23; P = .02), lower mortality 1-year (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI 0.62-0.98; P = .03) and fewer implant-related complications (odds ratio, 0.20; 95% CI 0.13-0.30; P < .00001) than Uncemented hemiarthroplasty. However, there are still some limitations in our study, such as the uniformity of the surgery administration programme and rehabilitation scheme, and the small sample size of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Cemented hemiarthroplasty for elderly patients with displaced fracture of femoral neck may acquire better functional results.

Cemented versus uncemented hemi-arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients with femoral neck fracture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for published randomized clinical trials comparing cemented hemiarthroplasty with uncemented hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients with a femoral neck fracture. The search was not limited to language, time, or other factors. The quality of each study was assessed using the revised Jadad scale. Two researchers independently extracted data from all selected studies, including the following base line data: study period, fracture stage, number of patients, male female ratio, average age, and per-protocol (PP) or intent-to-treat (ITT), and the interest outcomes: the mortality at 12 months, operative time, hospital stay, common complications, prosthetic-related complications, blood loss and Harris Hip Score (HHS). Fixed-effects or random-effects models with mean differences and odds ratios were used to pool the continuous and dichotomous variables to determine heterogeneity of the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies involving 1577 hips (782 uncemented and 795 cemented) were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis is indicated that the operation time of cemented hemiarthroplasty was longer than uncemented hemiarthroplasty and there was statistical significance between two groups (OR = -7.30, 95%CI, -13.13, -1.46; P = .01). However, there was no significant difference between the two methods of fixation in mortality at 12 months (OR = 1.22, 95%CI, 0.94-1.59; P = .14), hospital stay (OR = 0.26, 95%CI, -0.41, 0.93; P = .44), blood loss (OR = -17.94, 95%CI, -65.83, 29.95; P = .46), and HHS score. There were significant differences in the common complications of pulmonary embolism between the two groups, but there were no differences in the other five common complications. The results showed that uncemented hemiarthroplasty could reduce the incidence of pulmonary embolism after operation. Moreover, the outcomes of prosthetic-related complications showed that there were significant differences between the two groups in periprosthetic fracture (OR = 8.32, 95%CI, 3.85-17.98; P < .00001) and prosthetic subsidence and loosening (OR = 5.33, 95%CI, 2.18-13.00; P = .0002).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that uncemented prosthesis can shorten the operation time and reduce the incidence of pulmonary embolism, but it does not reduce mortality, blood loss, and hospital stay. Most importantly, the incidence of prosthetic-related complications was higher in uncemented patients.

Bone Loss Following Cementless Hemiarthroplasty for the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture

BACKGROUND

With the advances in medicine, an increasing number of the ageing population are a public health concern in terms of age-related complications. Among them, displaced neck fractures often require surgical intervention or arthroplasty to achieve the mobilization of the elderly and good life quality. The aim of the study is to monitor the changes in bone mineral density (BMD) around the femoral stem and the effects on functional outcomes in patients treated with cementless hemiarthroplasty following femoral neck fracture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Seventy-one patients aged 70 years or older who were treated with cementless hemiarthroplasty for a displaced femoral neck fracture were prospectively followed for 2 years. The percent change in the periprosthetic BMD in each Gruen zone was compared to the baseline using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA). Demographic factors [age, body mass index (BMI), and sex] that could possibly influence BMD and the clinical outcome were evaluated.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were available for the final follow-up. The mean age was 76.5 (range 70-89) years. The mean BMI was 28.9 (range 22.7-37.2). The mean Harris hip score at the final follow-up was 84.3 (range 72-93). There was a significant decrease in BMD in all Gruen zones (p < 0.001), except in zone 3 (R3, p = 0.547). The reduction in BMD was highest in the calcar and the greater trochanter region. The femur diaphysis was relatively spared, with zone 3 showing no significant bone mineral loss. The age and BMI of the patients were not correlated with the postoperative change in BMD in any of the Gruen zones. The degree of reduction in bone density was not correlated with the clinical outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Cementless hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of femoral neck fracture in elderly patients achieves a good clinical outcome despite significant bone loss around the femoral stem. The reduction in BMD is more pronounced in the metaphyseal region.

[Research progress in treatment of femoral neck fracture in the elderly]

OBJECTIVE

To introduce the research progress of conservative treatment, internal fixation, hip arthroplasty, and multidisciplinary team (MDT) modes in the treatment of femoral neck fracture in the elderly.

METHODS

By consulting domestic and foreign literature in recent years, the characteristics and application of various treatment methods and new treatment modes for femoral neck fracture in the elderly were summarized and analyzed.

RESULTS

The elderly non-displaced femoral neck fracture should be treated surgically, and conservative treatment has a high risk of secondary displacement. The displaced fracture should be operated as soon as possible. There is no difference in long-term functional outcome between hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty. Hemiarthroplasty has less intraoperative blood loss, shorter operation time, and is suitable for the elderly patients with poor basic condition. Total hip arthroplasty is suitable for the elderly patients with better basic condition and higher demand of life quality. MDT can effectively reduce preoperative waiting time and length of stay, reduce the incidence of medical complications, improve the nutritional status of patients, and reduce the mortality of patients.

CONCLUSION

Significant results have been achieved in the treatment of femoral neck fractures in the elderly by methods such as internal fixation, hip arthroplasty, and MDT.

Clinical Outcomes of Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty versus Total Hip Arthroplasty: Assessing the Potential Impact of Cement Use and Pre-Injury Activity Levels in Elderly Patients with Femoral Neck Fractures

Purpose

This study was performed to analyze the potential impact of cement use and favorable pre-injury activity on clinical outcomes of bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) compared with total hip arthroplasty (THA) in elderly patients with femoral neck fractures.

Materials and Methods

Systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 clinical studies (5 randomized controlled trials and 7 comparative studies). Subgroup analysis was performed based on type of fixation method (cemented vs. cementless) and in the patient with independent ambulation, respectively.

Results

A significantly higher dislocation rate was observed in patients treated with THA compared with those treated with BHA in individuals capable of independent ambulation before injury (odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05-0.62; P=0.05, Z=1.98). Also, the dislocation rate was significantly higher in patients treated with cemented THA compared with those treated with cemented BHA (OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.05-0.62; P=0.006, Z=2.73). EQ-5D was significantly higher in those treated with cemented THA compared with patients treated with cemented BHA. Lastly, HHS was significantly higher in patients treated with cementless THA compared with those treated with cementless BHA.

Conclusion

An increase in the dislocation rate was observed when THA was performed in elderly patients with femoral neck fracture and who were pre-injury independent walkers. In addition, cemented THA was associated with a higher dislocation rate compared with cemented BHA. However, the dislocation rate in those treated with cementless THA were similar to patients treated with cementless BHA. With regards to functional score, THA was superior to BHA in both cementless and cemented fixation.

Favorable Functional Recovery and Stem Stability after Hip Arthroplasty with a Short Metaphyseal Stem in Elderly Patients with Osteoporotic Femoral Neck Fractures

Purpose

Short stems have recently become widely used; however, concerns about the initial secure fixation of a short stem in osteoporotic bone remain. The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term clinical and radiological results of using a short cementless metaphyseal stabilizing tapered stem for senile osteoporotic femoral neck fractures.

Materials and Methods

Thirty-eight arthroplasties (31 bipolar hemiarthroplasties and 7 total hip arthroplasties) were performed for osteoporotic femoral neck fractures in patients older than 65 years (10 males and 28 females). The mean age was 76.1 years and the mean follow-up was 2.9 years. We retrospectively evaluated clinical results, focusing on walking performance, thigh pain, and radiologic results, with special regard to signs of stem stability and osteointegration.

Results

Mean Harris hip score was 84.3 points and 68.4% of patients regained their preoperative walking performance. No patients complained about thigh pain. No osteolysis or loosening was observed during the follow-up, and all but 1 stem showed signs of stable bone ingrowth.

Conclusion

Short, metaphyseal stabilizing tapered stems could be a reliable treatment option for osteoporotic femoral neck fractures.

Higher periprosthetic fracture rate associated with use of modern uncemented stems compared to cemented stems in femoral neck fractures

INTRODUCTION:

Hemiarthroplasty is the preferred treatment for displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. Recently, short tapered-wedge cementless stems have increasingly been used in this population. However, historic data has consistently shown higher rates of periprosthetic fracture with uncemented stems in hip fracture patients. This study aims to evaluate the rate of periprosthetic fracture requiring re-operation and all-cause mortality between cemented and uncemented femoral stem designs including more recent short tapered-wedge cementless stems in hip fracture patients.

METHODS:

A retrospective chart and radiographic review of patients received bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures from 2010-2016. Patients biologically (age ≥ 65 years) or physiologically (American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class ≥ 3) elderly were eligible. The uncemented group was subdivided into tapered-wedge stems (a broach only system) and reamed uncemented stems. The primary outcome was periprosthetic fracture requiring re-operation.

RESULTS:

We included 657 patients in total, with 296 and 361 patients in the uncemented and cemented stem groups respectively. In the uncemented group there were 197 tapered-wedge and 99 reamed uncemented stems. There was a significantly higher rate of periprosthetic fracture requiring re-operation in the uncemented group (3.0% vs. 0.6%) ( p ≤ 0.05). There were no significant differences in rates of all-cause mortality, infection or all-cause re-operation.

CONCLUSIONS:

Compared to modern uncemented femoral stem designs, cemented stems yield lower rates of periprosthetic fracture requiring re-operation, without increasing risk of all-cause mortality. Tapered-wedge stems had similar rates of re-operation due to periprosthetic fracture as reamed uncemented stems.

Do outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials of joint replacement surgery fulfil the OMERACT 2.0 Filter? A review of the 2008 and 2013 literature

BACKGROUND

It is not known, whether outcome reporting in trials of total joint arthroplasty in the recent years is adequate or not. Our objective was to assess whether outcomes reported in total joint replacement (TJR) trials fulfil the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Filter 2.0.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed all TJR trials in adults, published in English in 2008 or 2013. Searches were conducted in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. Two authors independently applied the inclusion criteria for the studies, and any disagreement was resolved with a third review author. All outcome measures were abstracted using a pre-piloted standardised data extraction form and assessed for whether they mapped to one of the three OMERACT Filter 2.0 core areas: pathophysiological, life impact, and death.

RESULTS

From 1635 trials identified, we included 70 trials (30 in 2008 and 40 in 2013) meeting the eligibility criteria. Twenty-two (31%) trials reported the three essential OMERACT core areas. Among the 27 hip replacement surgery trials and 39 knee replacement surgery trials included, 11 hip (41%) and nine knee (23%) trials reported all three essential OMERACT core areas. The most common outcome domains/measures were pain (20/27, 74%) and function (23/27, 85%) in hip trials and pain (26/39, 67%) and function (27/39, 69%) in knee trials. Results were similar for shoulder and hand joint replacement trials.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified significant gaps in the measurement of OMERACT core outcome areas in TJR trials, despite the majority reporting outcome domains of pain and function. An international consensus of key stakeholders is needed to develop a core domain set for reporting of TJR trials.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42014009216.

Outcome Measures Used in Arthroplasty Trials: Systematic Review of the 2008 and 2013 Literature

OBJECTIVE

Previously published literature assessing the reporting of outcome measures used in joint replacement randomized controlled trials (RCT) has revealed disappointing results. It remains unknown whether international initiatives have led to any improvement in the quality of reporting and/or a reduction in the heterogeneity of outcome measures used. Our objective was to systematically assess and compare primary outcome measures and the risk of bias in joint replacement RCT published in 2008 and 2013.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL for RCT investigating adult patients undergoing joint replacement surgery. Two authors independently identified eligible trials, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool.

RESULTS

Seventy RCT (30 in 2008, 40 in 2013) met the eligibility criteria. There was no significant difference in the number of trials judged to be at low overall risk of bias (n = 6, 20%) in 2008 compared with 2013 [6 (15%); chi-square = 0.302, p = 0.75]. Significantly more trials published in 2008 did not specify a primary outcome measure (n = 25, 83%) compared with 18 trials (45%) in 2013 (chi-square = 10.6316, p = 0.001). When specified, there was significant heterogeneity in the measures used to assess primary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

While less than a quarter of trials published in both 2008 and 2013 were judged to be at low overall risk of bias, significantly more trials published in 2013 specified a primary outcome. Although this might represent a temporal trend toward improvement, the overall frequency of primary outcome reporting and the wide heterogeneity in primary outcomes reported remain suboptimal.

Comparison of Postoperative Infection-Related Complications between Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in Elderly Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The purpose of this review was to assess the risk of infection-related complications following cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for published randomized clinical trials comparing cemented hemiarthroplasty with cementless hemiarthroplasty in patients with a femoral neck fracture and more than 65 years of age. Eight randomized controlled trials were available for analysis. A meta-analysis (with a fixed-effects model) and a meta-regression analysis (with continuous variables) were performed.

Results

The 8 trials included 1,204 hips (608 cemented and 596 cementless). There was no significant difference between the cemented and cementless groups regarding the incidence of deep infection, superficial infection, pneumonia, and urinary tract infection. The overall incidence of postoperative deep infection was 2.3% (14/608) in the cemented group and 1.2% (7/596) in the cementless group (relative risk, 1.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.74 to 4.14; I² = 0%; p = 0.206). No publication bias was found in the funnel plot.

Conclusions

Results of our meta-analysis suggest that when selecting a fixation method for hemiarthroplasty, infection-related postoperative complications are not the determinant factor to consider.

Regional bone loss following femoral neck fracture: A comparison between cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty

The aim of this prospective, randomised study was to measure and evaluate regional bone mineral changes and clinical results following the use of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty (HA) for treatment of femoral neck fracture in elderly patients. The study comprised 60 patients, 30 with cemented HA (group A) and 30 with cementless HA (group B). All patients underwent osteodensitometry of the contralateral hip, lumbar spine and bilateral distal femur. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) was scheduled at 1 month, 6 months and 1 year after surgery. Harris Hip Score (HHS) was used for functional assessment. Overall mortality rate was 20.3% within 1 year after surgery. There were no significant differences in morbidity, mortality and hospital stay between the two groups of patients. The implantation of cemented prosthesis took statistically significantly longer than that of cementless prosthesis (79.03±3.59 vs 68.02±5.97min; p=0.00). Functional score in patients treated with cemented HA was significantly higher compared with those with cementless HA. There was a trend of less intensive reduction of bone mineral density (BMD) in regions of interest of the lumbar spine and ipsilateral distal femur in patients with cemented HA (group A), whereas bone loss was less pronounced for the contralateral hip and distal femur in patients treated with cementless HA (group B). Management of displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients with cemented and cementless HA provides a comparable outcome with regard to morbidity and mortality; however, functional outcome of patients treated with cementless HA tends to be lower. There is less intensive BMD reduction in lumbar spine and ipsilateral distal femur in patients treated with cemented HA, whereas BMD reduction in patients treated with cementless HA is more likely to be less intensive in contralateral hip and distal femur.

What should be the preferred choice of hemiarthroplasty technique in American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class III patients with femoral neck fractures? Cemented or cementless

The hypothetical basis of this trial specifies that hemiarthroplasty applications without cement will prove to be superior to applications with cement in terms of survival, complications, clinical and radiological improvements in the early stages of femoral neck fracture cases, which belongs to the Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class III group. Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class III elderly patients (minimum 70 years of age), who had undergone surgical interventions for femoral neck fractures were classified into two groups as those undergoing the intervention without cement (Group A) and those undergoing the procedure with cement (Group B), and these were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were followed up for a mean duration of 47.4 and 44.8 months, respectively. Survival in the early stage, duration of stay in the intensive care, intraoperative cardiac indexes, complications, clinical and radiological parameters were the main factors used in the evaluation and comparisons. The mean duration of operation in Group B cases was determined to be statistically significantly longer than that of Group A (p<0.001). The postoperative stay at the intensive care unit in both groups and the rate of mortality for 6 months in Group B were determined to be statistically significantly high (p<0.05). In group B, significant depressive findings were determined in the comparison of the intra-operative pre-and post-cement cardiac indexes. In the clinical assessment, no statistically significant results were obtained, although higher final Harris scores were determined in Group A cases (p=0.581). In the treatment of femoral neck fractures, bipolar hemiarthroplasty applications without cement provide favourable early and short-term results, which are at least as effective as the applications with cement.

Periprosthetic femoral fractures after hemiarthroplasty. An analysis of 17 cases

PURPOSE

To describe the characteristics of patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures after hemiarthroplasty and analyze their treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

An observational, longitudinal, retrospective study was conducted on a series of 17 patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures after hip hemiarthroplasty. Fourteen fractures were treated surgically. The characteristics of patients, fractures and treatment outcomes in terms of complications, mortality and functionality were analyzed.

RESULTS

The large majority (82%) of patients were women, the mean age was 86 years and with an ASA index of 3 or 4 in 15 patients. Ten fractures were type B. There were 8 general complications, one deep infection, one mobilization of a non-exchanged hemiarthroplasty, and 2 non-unions. There were 85% consolidated fractures, and only 5 patients recovered the same function prior to the injury. At the time of the study 9 patients had died (53%).

DISCUSSION

Periprosthetic femoral fractures after hemiarthroplasty will increase in the coming years and their treatment is difficult.

CONCLUSION

Periprosthetic femoral fractures after hemiarthroplasty are more common in women around 90 years-old, and usually occur in patients with significant morbidity. Although the Vancouver classification is reliable, simple and reproducible, it is only a guide to decide on the best treatment in a patient often fragile. The preoperative planning is essential when deciding a surgical treatment.