Social function after cervical hip fracture. A comparison of hook-pins and total hip replacement in 47 patients

Cannulated screws versus dynamic hip screw versus hemiarthroplasty versus total hip arthroplasty in patients with displaced and non-displaced femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of 5703 patients

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to determine the best operative procedure in human participants with a displaced or non-displaced femoral neck fracture comparing cannulated screw (CS) fixation, dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation, hemiarthroplasty (HA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in terms of surgical and functional outcomes, reoperation and postoperative complications.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Clinical trials, CINAHL, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs up to 31 July 2022. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed to assess the comparative effects of the four operative procedures, using fixed-effects and random-effects models. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for continuous variables and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were estimated for binary variables.

RESULTS

A total of 33 RCTs with 5703 patients were included in our network meta-analysis. CS fixation was best in terms of operation time (CS: MD = - 57.70, 95% CI - 72.78; - 42.62; DHS: MD = - 53.56, 95% CI - 76.17; - 30.95; HA: MD = - 20.90, 95% CI - 30.65; - 11.15; THA: MD = 1.00 reference) and intraoperative blood loss (CS: MD = - 3.67, 95% CI - 4.44; - 2.90; DHS: MD = - 3.20, 95% CI - 4.97; - 1.43; HA: MD = - 1.20, 95% CI - 1.73; - 0.67; THA: MD = 1.00 reference). In life quality and functional outcome, measured at different time points with EQ-5D and the Harris Hip Score (HHS), THA ranked first and HA second (e.g. EQ-5D 2 years postoperatively: CS: MD = - 0.20, 95% CI - 0.29; - 0.11; HA: MD = - 0.09, 95% CI - 0.17; - 0.02; THA: MD = 1.00 reference; HHS 2 years postoperatively: CS: MD = - 5.50, 95% CI - 9.98; - 1.03; DHS: MD = - 8.93, 95% CI - 15.08; - 2.78; HA: MD = - 3.65, 95% CI - 6.74; - 0.57; THA: MD = 1.00 reference). CS fixation had the highest reoperation risk, followed by DHS fixation, HA, and THA (CS: OR = 9.98, 95% CI 4.60; 21.63; DHS: OR = 5.07, 95% CI 2.15; 11.96; HA: OR = 1.60, 95% CI 0.89; 2.89; THA: OR = 1.00 reference).

CONCLUSION

In our cohort of patients with displaced and non-displaced femoral neck fractures, HHS, EQ-5D, and reoperation risk showed an advantage of THA and HA compared with CS and DHS fixation. Based on these findings, we recommend that hip arthroplasty should be preferred and internal fixation of femoral neck fractures should only be considered in individual cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I

a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO on 10 August 2022 (CRD42022350293).

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.

Use of Dual Mobility Acetabular Component and Anterior Approach in Patients With Displaced Femoral Neck Fracture

BACKGROUND

Although the antidislocation effect of total hip arthroplasty (THA) via the direct anterior approach (DAA) with dual mobility cup (DMC) for displaced femoral neck fracture (FNF) has already been reported, the clinical result of DMC-DAA-THA for displaced FNF in terms of mortality, complications, and walking ability are still unclear.

METHODS

106 cases with DMC-DAA-THA for displaced FNF were investigated of dislocation; perioperative complications; 3-, 6-, and12-month mortality rate; and pre/early postoperative walking ability. The walking ability was stratified into the following four categories: (1) use of a wheelchair (no walking), (2) walking alongside a support (including walkers designed for the elderly), (3) walking using one stick, and (4) unaided walking.

RESULTS

There was no dislocation withing one-year postoperative. The 3-, 6-, and 12-month mortality rate was 2.8%, 4.7%, and 5.7%. Total complications occurred in 14 cases (14.7%). Although there was no revision surgery, two cases (1.9%) of intraoperative fracture treated without additional fixation, and one case of postoperative fracture was occurred. Among patients with preinjury walking category 2, 3, and 4 (total 94 cases), the number of patients who recovered same walking category at two-week postoperation was 56 cases (59.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that DMC-DAA-THA for displaced FNF offered quick recovery of walking ability with no dislocation and low one-year mortality rate. We believe that the combination of early postoperative recovery due to the minimal invasiveness of the DAA and decreased dislocation rate due to increased range of motion by DMC and adequate soft tissue tension by DAA contributed to null dislocation.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing arthroplasty and internal fixation in the treatment of elderly displaced femoral neck fractures

Background:

Currently, there are 2 mainstream treatments for displaced femoral neck fracture, including internal fixation and arthroplasty. However, there are still some controversial problems as to which treatment should be primarily chosen.

Methods:

The relevant studies comparing arthroplasty with internal fixation were searched in the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Finally, 31 relevant randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis. The quality of studies was evaluated and meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.3 software. We also assessed the heterogeneity among studies and publication bias via the I-squared index and forest plots.

Results:

There was no significant difference between arthroplasty and internal fixation groups in patient mortality at both short-term and long-term points. However, patients treated with arthroplasty showed significantly lowered risks of reoperation both at short-term (5.6% vs 31.5%; relative risks (RR)  = 0.19; 95% CI, 0.13–0.28; P < .00001) and long-term follow-up (9.5% vs 45.9%; RR = 0.23; 95% CI, 0.17–0.33; P < .00001). Similarly, arthroplasty-treated patients demonstrated a significant decrease in the risk of postoperation complications at short-term (10.3% vs 34.4%; RR = 0.37, 95% CI, 0.24–0.57; P < .00001) and long-term follow-up (11.7% vs 42.5%; RR = 0.30, 95% CI, 0.16–0.57; P < .0002). Besides, patients in the arthroplasty group were associated with better alleviation of pain postoperation (18.3% vs 31.1%; RR = 0.50, 95% CI, 0.33–0.78; P = .002).

In trial sequence analyses, all cumulative Z curves except that of mortality crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundaries and conventional boundaries, and required information size has been reached.

Conclusions:

Arthroplasty leads to a lower rate of reoperation, a reduced risk of complications, and a better alleviation of postoperation pain both at short-term and long-term follow-up. Most importantly, and according to trial sequence analyses, more than enough evidence has been achieved that arthroplasty does show better outcomes than internal fixation in terms of reoperation rate, complications, and postoperation pain.

Level of Evidence:

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Interventions for treating displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures in the elderly: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Displaced intracapsular femoral neck (AO type 31 B2/3) fractures have various treatments, including internal fixation (IF), unipolar uncemented hemiarthroplasty (HA), bipolar uncemented HA, unipolar cemented HA, bipolar cemented HA, uncemented total hip replacement (THR), and cemented THR. Systematic literature retrieval was performed from the databases to compare them in a network meta-analysis. Forty studies (85 arms) containing 6141 patients were included. Overall, our network meta-analysis rank the orders of 7 procedures in reoperation, mortality, dislocation and infection, which indicates that IF may provide the highest reoperation incidence, unipolar cemented HA may provide the lowest reoperation incidence; uncemented THR contributes the highest dislocation incidence; and bipolar uncemented HA provides the lowest infection incidence. No differences in mortality were observed among the treatments. This conclusion is indirect; higher-quality direct comparisons are required.

Comparison of arthroplasty vs. osteosynthesis for displaced femoral neck fractures: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis compared clinical outcomes of arthroplasty vs. osteosynthesis for displaced femoral neck fractures.

METHODS

Meta-analysis was performed on the difference in revision rate and overall mortality between participants undergoing osteosynthesis vs. total hip arthroplasty (THA), osteosynthesis vs. hemiarthroplasty (HA), or THA vs. HA.

RESULTS

Pooled direct and indirect results indicated no significant difference in mortality between THA and HA (pooled OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.38; P = 0.556), between THA and osteosynthesis (pooled OR = 1.17, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.99; P = 0.553), and between HA and osteosynthesis (pooled OR = 1.21, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.74; P = 0.304). Pooled direct and indirect results indicated no significant difference in revision rates between THA and HA (pooled OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.26 to 3.19; P = 0.874). But, fewer revisions (OR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.34; P = 0.000) were seen in patients treated with THA than osteosynthesis and also in those treated with HA than osteosynthesis (OR = 0.12, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.20; P = 0.000). After excluding studies without showing normal cognition in inclusion criteria, pooled direct and indirect results also indicated no significant difference in mortality between THA, HA, and osteosynthesis. Similarly, there was no significant difference in revision rates between THA and HA, but HA and THA had significantly lower revision rates compared with osteosynthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in overall mortality among osteosynthesis, HA, and THA. However, HA and THA had significantly lower revision rates compared with osteosynthesis. Results of the present study provide support for the use of hip arthroplasty to treat displaced fractures of the femoral neck.

Meta-Analysis of a Complex Network of Non-Pharmacological Interventions: The Example of Femoral Neck Fracture

Background

Surgical interventions raise specific methodological issues in network meta-analysis (NMA). They are usually multi-component interventions resulting in complex networks of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), with multiple groups and sparse connections.

Purpose

To illustrate the applicability of the NMA in a complex network of surgical interventions and to prioritize the available interventions according to a clinically relevant outcome.

Methods

We considered RCTs of treatments for femoral neck fracture in adults. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov up to November 2015. Two reviewers independently selected trials, extracted data and used the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing the risk of bias. A group of orthopedic surgeons grouped similar but not identical interventions under the same node. We synthesized the network using a Bayesian network meta-analysis model. We derived posterior odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals (95% CrIs) for all possible pairwise comparisons. The primary outcome was all-cause revision surgery.

Results

Data from 27 trials were combined, for 4,186 participants (72% women, mean age 80 years, 95% displaced fractures). The median follow-up was 2 years. With hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) as a comparison, risk of surgical revision was significantly higher with the treatments unthreaded cervical osteosynthesis (OR 8.0 [95% CrI 3.6–15.5] and 5.9 [2.4–12.0], respectively), screw (9.4 [6.0–16.5] and 6.7 [3.9–13.6]) and plate (12.5 [5.8–23.8] and 7.8 [3.8–19.4]).

Conclusions

In older women with displaced femoral neck fractures, arthroplasty (HA and THA) is the most effective treatment in terms of risk of revision surgery.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO no. CRD42013004218.

Level of Evidence

Network Meta-Analysis, Level 1.

Outcome of hemiarthroplasty and total hip replacement for active elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures: a meta-analysis of 8 randomized clinical trials

Background

Displaced fracture of the femoral neck has been a common clinical problem, especially in aged patients. However, the optimal treatment choice remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review of randomized clinical trials assessing the results of hemiarthroplasty and total hip replacement in patients undergoing either alternative using meta-analysis.

Methods

A literature search for randomized clinical trials was conducted through Medline, Embase and Cochrane library between 1969 and 2013 with no restrictions. Additional relevant articles were referred as source of information by way of manual searches on major orthopedic journals. Upon the search, two authors independently evaluated study quality and relevant data was extracted.

Results

A total of 8 studies with 983 patients were included in this meta-analysis. After pooling the available data, a significant dominance of Harris hip score was found for total hip replacement compared with hemiarthroplasty (SMD: −7.11, 95%:−10.70,−3.53) one year postoperatively and the advantage kept over (SMD: −6.91, 95%:−12.98, −0.85) two years after surgery. A trend toward a higher dislocation rate was found in total hip replacement group (RR: 0.46, 95%: 0.21, 1.02), of which the difference was considered insignificant. The risk of revision in group hemiarthroplasty appeared to be more than two folds higher than that after total hip replacement (RR: 4.14, 95%CI: 2.09, 8.19).

Conclusion

Even though there is a higher rate of dislocation after total hip replacement, this disadvantage could be accounted for, on the basis of a better functional score and the lower revision rate. However, from the results, it stands to reason that total hip replacement should be strongly suggested in elderly active patients with femoral neck fracture.

Subcapital fractures: a changing paradigm

Options for the treatment of subcapital femoral neck fractures basically fall into two categories: internal fixation or arthroplasty (either hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty). Historically, the treatment option has been driven by a diagnosis-related approach (non-displaced neck fractures versus displaced neck fractures). More recently, the traditional paradigm has changed. Instead of a diagnosis-related approach, it has become more of a patient-related approach. Treatment options take in to consideration the patient's age, functional demands, and individual risk profile. A simple algorithm can be helpful in terms of directing the treatment. Non-displaced fractures, regardless of age of the patient, should be treated with closed reduction and internal fixation. For displaced femoral neck fractures, the treatment differs depending on the age of the patient. The younger patient should be treated with urgent ORIF with the goal of an anatomic reduction. For displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly, cognitive function should be determined. For those who are cognitively functioning, total hip arthroplasty appears to be the best option. In the cognitively dysfunctional, a bipolar hemiarthroplasty or a total hip arthroplasty with use of larger heads (32 mm or 36 mm) and/or constrained sockets are a viable option.

Osteoporotic hip fractures: the burden of fixation failure

Osteoporotic hip fractures are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Furthermore, reduced implant anchorage in osteoporotic bone predisposes towards fixation failure and with an ageing population, even low failure rates represent a significant challenge to healthcare systems. Fixation failure in fragility fractures of the hip ranges from 5% in peritrochanteric fractures through to 15% and 41% in undisplaced and displaced fractures of the femoral neck, respectively. Our findings, in general, support the view that failed internal fixation of these fragility fractures carries a poor prognosis: it leads to a twofold increase in the length of hospital stay and a doubling of healthcare costs. Patients are more likely to suffer a downgrade in their residential status upon discharge with a consequent increase in social dependency. Furthermore, the marked disability and reduction in quality of life evident before salvage procedures may persist at long-term followup. The risk, of course, for the elderly patient with a prolonged period of decreased functioning is that the disability becomes permanent. Despite this, however, no clear link between revision surgery and an increase in mortality has been demonstrated in the literature.

Which is the best alternative for displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly?: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures includes internal fixation and arthroplasty. However, whether arthroplasty or internal fixation is the primary treatment for displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients remains a subject for debate. The literature contains conflicting evidence regarding rates of mortality, revision surgery, major postoperative complications, and function in elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures treated either by internal fixation or arthroplasty (either hemiarthroplasty or THA).

QUESTIONS/PURPOSE

We determined mortality, revision surgery rates, major surgical complications (which include infection, nonunion or early redisplacement, avascular necrosis, dislocation, loosening of the prosthesis, acetabular erosion, fracture below or around the implant, and other severe general complications such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism), and function in patients treated with either internal fixation or arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing internal fixation and arthroplasty. We identified 20 RCTs with 4508 patients meeting all the criteria for eligibility. We performed a meta-analysis of the major complications, reoperations, function, pain, and mortality.

RESULTS

Compared with internal fixation, arthroplasty reduced the risk of the major complications (95% CI, 0.21-0.54 for 1 year; 95% CI, 0.16-0.31 for 5 years) and the incidence of reoperation 1 to 5 years after surgery (95% CI, 0.15-0.34 for 1 year; 95% CI, 0.08-0.24 for 5 years), and provided better pain relief (95% CI, 0.34-0.72). Function was superior (RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.79) for patients treated with arthroplasty than for patients treated by internal fixation. However, mortality 1 to 3 years after surgery was similar (95% CI, 0.96-1.23, p = 0.20 for 1 year; 95% CI, 0.91-1.17, p = 0.63 for 3 years).

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroplasty can reduce the risk of major complications and the incidence of reoperation compared with internal fixation, and provide better pain relief and function, but it does not reduce mortality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prognostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Poor citation of prior evidence in hip fracture trials

BACKGROUND

Failure to cite prior evidence in the medical literature may result in publication redundancy and inefficient use of research funding. We evaluated trials in which internal fixation was compared with arthroplasty for the treatment of hip fractures in order to determine the extent to which these randomized trials cited all relevant previous trials.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Embase for all relevant articles on four topics: internal fixation compared with arthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty, sliding hip screws compared with other fixation devices, and surgical delay of hip fracture treatment. We determined the proportion of previous studies that were cited in comparison with the total number of previous studies that were citable (i.e., the citation rate) as well as the proportion of times that a study was cited in comparison with the total number of times that it could have been cited (i.e., the hit rate). A cumulative meta-analysis was performed for the "internal fixation compared with arthroplasty" topic to determine whether compelling evidence favoring one intervention existed at an earlier time.

RESULTS

In total, sixty studies were assessed and yielded an overall citation rate of 48%. All "highly cited" studies reported a positive result (favoring arthroplasty), and 60% were published in The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American or British volume). The results of a study and the journal of publication significantly affected the hit rate (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review of studies of hip fracture treatment suggests poor citation of the previous literature. Studies in higher-impact journals with positive results are more likely to be cited in subsequent studies. Therefore, redundancy in publication and unnecessary surgical trials often occur.

Evidence summary: systematic review of surgical treatments for geriatric hip fractures

BACKGROUND

There is a growing body of literature on surgical treatments for elderly patients with a hip fracture and the effects of various surgical procedures on complications and postoperative outcomes. No single review has previously summarized the literature on the effects of surgical procedures on outcomes after treatment across all types of hip fractures. We conducted a comprehensive systematic literature review to organize the clinical evidence for patient-centered outcomes across all types of geriatric hip fractures.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scirus, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized clinical trials and observational studies published between 1985 and 2008. We also manually searched reference lists from relevant systematic reviews.

RESULTS

We found eighty-four [corrected] articles representing seventy-four [corrected] unique, randomized, controlled trials, including thirty-three [corrected] on femoral neck fractures, forty on intertrochanteric fractures, and one on subtrochanteric fractures. Nine observational studies addressed the link between patient characteristics and outcome variables by fracture type. Age, sex, prefracture functioning, and cognitive impairment are related to mortality and functional outcomes. Fracture type does not appear to be independently related to patient outcomes. Mortality, pain, function, and quality of life did not differ by surgical implant class, or by implants within a class. Neither the randomized controlled trials nor the observational literature include the full complement of potential covariates that can impact treatment outcomes after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The broader questions about the relationship of patient factors, fracture type, and specific treatments to the outcomes of mortality, functional status, and quality of life cannot be addressed with the existing literature. Research should include comprehensive conceptual models that capture complete sets of important independent variables. Studies of musculoskeletal outcomes, including hip fracture, require well-defined patient groups and consistent use of validated outcome measures.

[The treatment of femoral neck fractures]

BACKGROUND

About 5000 people fracture their femoral neck every year in Norway. Mean age is about 83 years and about 3/4 are women. For more than 50 years the alternatives have been internal fixation or arthroplasty. In Norway, the tradition has been internal fixation. Recent studies, however, support the use of arthroplasty. The article provides a review on the treatment of femoral neck fractures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article is based on literature identified through a non-systematic search in Medline.

RESULTS

Internal fixation has a higher risk of treatment failure (30 - 40 % in displaced fractures) than arthroplasty (less than 10 %). In elderly patients with displaced fractures, arthroplasty provides better hip function than internal fixation. Most patients should be treated with hemiarthroplasty, but total hip arthroplasty may give better function in the healthiest and fittest of the elderly patients. In patients younger than 60 - 65 years, internal fixation should be attempted, even though the failure rate is about 30 %. Undisplaced fractures should be treated with internal fixation, irrespective of age. The risk of treatment failure is about 10 %.

INTERPRETATION

Elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures should be treated with arthroplasty, usually hemiarthroplasty. Osteosynthesis should normally be reserved for undisplaced fractures and fractures in young and otherwise healthy patients.

Long-term follow-up of replacement compared with internal fixation for displaced femoral neck fractures

In a series of 450 patients over 70 years of age with displaced fractures of the femoral neck sustained between 1995 and 1997 treatment was randomised either to internal fixation or replacement. Depending on age and level of activity the latter was either a total hip replacement or a hemiarthroplasty. Patients who were confused or bed-ridden were excluded, as were those with rheumatoid arthritis. At ten years there were 99 failures (45.6%) after internal fixation compared with 17 (8.8%) after replacement. The rate of mortality was high at 75% at ten years, and was the same in both groups at all times. Patient-reported pain and function were similar in both groups at five and ten years. Those with successfully healed fractures had more hip pain and reduction of mobility at four months compared with patients with an uncomplicated replacement, and they never attained a better outcome than the latter patients regarding pain or function.

Primary replacement gave reliable long-term results in patients with a displaced fracture of the femoral neck.

Total hip arthroplasty for displaced fracture of the femoral neck using size 32 mm femoral head and soft tissue repair after a posterior approach

The optimal operative treatment of displaced sub capital femoral fractures in the elderly is controversial. Recently, randomised controlled trials have suggested a better outcome with the use of total hip arthroplasty (THA) to treat displaced intra capsular fractures of the femur for elderly patients in good health. However, overall there is limited evidence to support the choice between different types of arthroplasty. Dislocation remains a concern with THA, especially when a posterior approach is used. We analysed the outcome of twenty primary cementless THA using a posterior approach with soft tissue repair and a size 32 mm head in active elderly patients presenting with displaced intra capsular femoral neck fractures. We also compared the results with the outcome in a cohort of matched patients who underwent primary THA for osteoarthritis. Satisfactory results were noted in terms of pain control, return to pre-morbid activity and radiological evidence of bone implant osseointegration. The functional outcome in the fracture group was similar to the osteoarthritis group. In conclusion, with optimal patient selection THA seems to provide a good functional outcome and pain control in the management of displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures. Use of 32 mm head and posterior capsule repair may reduce the high risk of dislocation noted with the posterior approach.

Internal fixation versus arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures: what is the evidence?

A review of the current evidence for internal fixation versus hemiarthroplasty versus primary total hip arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures was undertaken. At the meta-analysis level no difference in postoperative pain, function, or quality of life can yet be demonstrated. A significant difference in mortality has also not been found, but a trend towards higher mortality after primary arthroplasty is possible. Internal fixation (IF) has less morbidity, but a higher risk of revision and less cost-effectiveness. Independent adjudication for IF technique is rare in studies and bias towards higher revision rates due to technical failure is an issue. Randomized trials comparing IF with arthroplasty remain underpowered in specific subgroups of patients, in which IF revision rates could be acceptable. In hemiarthroplasty the data suggest minimal differences in outcome between the prosthesis types. The cementless Austin-Moore prosthesis is out-dated. Currently a cemented unipolar or bipolar, depending on costs, hemi-arthroplasty is the treatment of choice for an elderly patient with functional limitations before the fracture. The role of modern, uncemented hemiarthroplasty designs are uncertain until more data are published. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) should be considered in any active older patient with a displaced femoral neck fracture. Patients with concomitant osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or renal failure do poorly with other treatment options and should be treated with THA. Randomized trials have shown THA to be a cost-effective treatment with lower revision rates than IF. THA may also appear to be superior to hemiarthroplasty in specific subgroups, but larger trials are needed to confirm this observation.

Outcome after primary and secondary replacement for subcapital fracture of the hip in 10 264 patients

Between 1999 and 2005, 10 264 patients who had undergone total hip replacement (THR) for subcapital fracture of the hip were compared with 76 520 in whom THR had been performed for other reasons. All the cases were identified through the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. The THRs performed as primary treatment for fracture were also compared with those done after failure of internal fixation.

After seven years the rate of revision was higher in THR after fracture (4.4% vs 2.9%). Dislocation and periprosthetic fracture were the most common causes of revision. The risk was higher in men than in women. The type of femoral component and the surgical approach influenced the risk. After correction for gender, type of component and the surgical approach the revision rates were similar in the primary and secondary fracture THR groups.

Total hip replacement is therefore a safe method for both the primary and secondary management of fracture of the hip.

Meta-analysis comparing arthroplasty with internal fixation for displaced femoral neck fracture in the elderly

BACKGROUND

The treatment of displaced femoral neck fracture includes internal fixation and arthroplasty. However, which is the best surgical treatment for the elderly patient with displaced femoral neck fractures has been controversial. Our objective was to compare the clinical effects of internal fixation with that of arthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture in the elderly (≥60 y of age).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched for all randomized controlled trials of hip arthroplasty versus internal fixation for displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly by electronically searching PUBMED (1966 to December, 2008), MEDILINE (1966 to December, 2008) and manually searching grey literatures. The quality of the trials was assessed and meta-analyses were conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration's RevMan 4.2 software.

RESULTS

Nineteen published randomized controlled trials involving a total of 3505 patients were suitable for inclusion in the review. The combined results of meta-analyses showed no significant difference in mortality at 1 y postoperatively between the two methods. However, compared with internal fixation, arthroplasty could reduce the rate of reoperations and the major method-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with internal fixation, arthroplasty can not only reduce the surgical revision, but also decrease the incidence of complications, and does not increase mortality. The present meta-analysis shows that there is an evidence base to support arthroplasty as a primary treatment for displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly.

Arthroplasty or internal fixation for displaced femoral neck fractures: which is the optimal alternative for elderly patients? A meta-analysis

We conducted an up-to-date meta-analysis of 20 eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) containing 3,109 patients to compare arthroplasty with internal fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures regarding the effect on clinical outcomes. Computerised databases were searched for RCTs published from January 1979 to May 2008. The results showed that compared to internal fixation arthroplasty led to significantly fewer surgical complications at two and five years postoperatively and reduced the incidence of reoperation at one, two and five years postoperatively (P < 0.001). However, arthroplasty was associated with greater risk of deep wound infection, longer operating time and greater operative blood loss. Arthroplasty substantially increased the risk of reoperation following deep wound infection (P < 0.05). For mortality, there was increased postoperative risk for arthroplasty compared with internal fixation, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups at the different follow-up times. For pain at one year postoperatively, the result showed no statistically significant difference.

Trends in surgical management of femoral neck fractures in the United States

We examined trends in utilization of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), THA, and hemiarthroplasty (HA) for femoral neck fractures. Closed femoral neck fractures managed with ORIF or hip arthroplasty (n = 162,257) were extracted from 1990 to 2001 Nationwide Inpatient Samples. Trends were examined during three periods (1990-1993 [Period I], 1994-1997 [Period II], and 1998-2001 [Period III]). Utilization of HA increased from 67.8% in Period I to 75.3% in Period III. In the same period, utilization of THA decreased from 11.6% to 6.6%. The trend of decreased use of THA was consistent regardless of age, hospital, or surgeon volume. In Period III, 28.7% of patients were managed at urban teaching hospitals as compared with 19.6% in Period I. Increased utilization of HA conforms with recent evidence that arthroplasty has better outcomes than ORIF. However, the decrease in THA is contrary to what was expected, and its impact on patient outcomes needs to be evaluated. The increase in the proportion of femoral fractures managed at urban teaching hospitals may reflect a change in the organization of trauma systems during the last decade.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, diagnostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Primary total hip arthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck: Medium-term functional and radiographic outcomes

The number of complications after primary total hip arthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck is higher than that after operations for osteoarthritis. The aim of this study is to evaluate the number of complications and mid-term functional and radiological findings of patients after primary THA for displaced intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck. Between 1995 and 1998, we operated on a total of 89 patients for acute displaced intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck, i.e. Garden Type 3 and 4. In all the patients we evaluated intraoperative and early postoperative complications. We reviewed clinical and radiological results in 65 patients. The only intraoperative complication was abruption of the greater trochanter. Early postoperative complications occurred in 13 patients (15%). The specific complications, THA dislocation, occurred in 3 patients. Non-specific complications were recorded in 10 patients. No delayed healing of the surgical wound, neural lesion or early, delayed or late infection was recorded. Of 65 patients followed-up for an average of 78 months (range, 62–109 months), 8 patients underwent revision surgery. Of 57 patients with primary THA, very good and good clinical results according to the Harris Hip Score were recorded in 48 patients (84%) and poor results in only 2 patients (4%). Nine of 57 followed-up patients showed radiological signs of loosening (16%). The radiolucent line could be seen in 3 patients in the region of the cup, in 1 patient in the region of the femoral component and in 5 patients in both components. Clinical complaints that would result in indication for reimplantation were recorded in none of the mentioned patients. Number of complications, functional results and resumption of full self-reliance by patients after THA for an intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck are so positive that we consider the indication of THA for a displaced femoral neck fracture fully justified.

Prosthetic replacement in femoral neck fracture in the elderly: results and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur account for a major share of fractures in the elderly. The primary goal of treatment is to return the patient to his or her pre-fracture functional status. There are multiple internal fixation options (screws, dynamic hip screw plate or blade plates) and hemi and total hip arthroplasty. Open reduction and internal fixation has been shown to have a high rate of revision surgery due to nonunion and avascular necrosis. Hip replacement arthroplasty (hemi or total) is a viable treatment option.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-four elderly patients (age >70 years) with a femoral neck fracture were treated over a five-year period (January 2001 to December 2006). Eighty of the 84 patients underwent some form of hip replacement after appropriate medical and anesthetic fitness.

RESULTS

We had good results in all the patients in terms of return to pre-fracture level of activity, independent ambulation and satisfaction with the procedure. Patients over the age of 80 years who underwent bipolar hemiarthroplasty all progressed well without any complication. Patients in their seventies underwent some form of total hip replacement and barring one case of deep infection, two cases of deep vein thrombosis and three cases of dislocation (which were managed conservatively), there were no real complications.

CONCLUSION

Hip replacement (hemi or total) is a successful procedure for the elderly population over 70 years with femoral neck fractures. Return to pre-morbid level of activity and independent functions occur very swiftly, avoiding the hazards of prolonged incumbency. We have proposed a treatment algorithm following the results of treatment of this fracture in our series. We have also reviewed the different contemporary treatment options used (conservative treatment, cancellous screw fixation, Dynamic Hip Screw (DHS) fixation, hemi and total hip replacement) used for treatment of an elderly patient with of femoral neck fracture.

A randomised controlled trial comparing bipolar hemiarthroplasty with total hip replacement for displaced intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck in elderly patients

The best treatment for the active and lucid elderly patient with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck is still controversial. Randomised controlled trials have shown that a primary total hip replacement is superior to internal fixation as regards the need for secondary surgery, hip function and health-related quality of life. Despite good results achieved with total hip replacement in this group, most orthopaedic surgeons still advocate hemiarthroplasty for this injury. We studied 120 patients with a mean age of 81 years (70 to 90) with an acute displaced intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck. They were randomly allocated to be treated with either a bipolar hemiarthroplasty or total hip replacement. Outcome measurements included peri-operative data, general and hip-specific complications, hip function and health-related quality of life. The patients were reviewed at four and 12 months.

The duration of surgery was longer in the total hip replacement group (102 minutes (70 to 151)) versus 78 minutes (43 to 131) (p < 0.001), and the intra-operative blood loss was increased 460 ml (100 to 1100) versus 320 ml (50 to 850) (p < 0.001), but there were no differences between the groups regarding any complications or mortality. There were no dislocations in either group. Hip function measured by the Harris hip score was significantly better in the total hip replacement group at both follow-up periods (p = 0.011 and p < 0.001, respectively). The health-related quality of life measure was in favour of the total hip replacement group but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.818 at four months and p = 0.636 at 12 months).

These results indicate that a total hip replacement provides better function than a bipolar hemiarthroplasty as soon as one year post-operatively, without increasing the complication rate. We recommend total hip replacement as the primary treatment for this group of patients.

Internal fixation versus arthroplasty for intracapsular proximal femoral fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

Displaced intracapsular fractures may be treated by either reduction and internal fixation, which preserves the femoral head, or by replacement of the femoral head with an arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomised controlled trials that have compared internal fixation with arthroplasty for intracapsular femoral fractures in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (December 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 4), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the UK National Research Register, several orthopaedic journals, conference proceedings and reference lists of articles. We contacted trialists where possible.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing internal fixation with arthroplasty for intracapsular hip fractures in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed by use of a 10 item scale. At least two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Additional information was sought from trialists. After grouping into three broad categories, comparable groups of trials were subgrouped and where appropriate, data were pooled using the fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen trials involving 2694 participants were included. Length of surgery, operative blood loss, need for blood transfusion and risk of deep wound infection were significantly less for internal fixation compared with arthroplasty. Arthroplasty had a significantly lower re-operation rate in comparison with fixation. No definite differences for hospital stay, mortality, or regain of same residential state were found. Limited information from some studies suggested pain was less and function was better for a cemented arthroplasty in comparison to fixation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Internal fixation is associated with less initial operative trauma but has an increased risk of re-operation on the hip. Definite conclusions cannot be made for differences in pain and residual disability between the two groups. Future studies should concentrate on better reporting of final outcome measures and there is still a need for studies to define which patient groups are better served by the different treatment methods.

Displaced femoral neck fracture: comparison of primary total hip replacement with secondary replacement after failed internal fixation: a 2-year follow-up of 84 patients

INTRODUCTION

Recent randomized controlled trials have shown that for the active and lucid elderly patient with a displaced femoral neck fracture, a primary total hip replacement (THR) is superior to internal fixation (IF) regarding the need for secondary surgery, hip function and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Despite the high failure rate for IF, the method is still recommended for this patient cohort by some authors. One argument is that if IF fails, there is always the possibility of performing a secondary salvage THR. The main aim of our study was to determine whether a primary THR, as compared to a secondary THR after failed IF, gives a better outcome after 2 years.

METHODS

We compared outcome for 43 patients with a primary THR to the outcome for 41 patients who were treated with a secondary THR after failed IF. All patients (mean age 80 years) were lucid and had a displaced femoral neck fracture. Hip function (Charnley score) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL, EQ5D) were assessed 2 years after the THR procedure.

RESULTS

Hip function was better in the primary THR group: the mean Charnley score was 15/18 as compared to 13/18 in the secondary THR group (p < 0.001). The patients with failed IF who later underwent a secondary THR experienced a more pronounced decrease in HRQoL (EQ-5D index score) during the first year of treatment compared to patients in the primary THR group, with a difference of 0.25 in the EQ-5D index score at the 4-month follow-up (p = 0.02).

INTERPRETATION

We found that a secondary THR after failed IF results in inferior hip function compared to a primary THR for a displaced femoral neck fracture in the active and lucid elderly patient. Moreover, the patients with failed IF had to undergo at least one re-operation and experienced a significant reduction in HRQoL before the salvage THR.

Primary arthroplasty is better than internal fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures: a meta-analysis of 14 randomized studies with 2,289 patients

BACKGROUND

The treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures has long been debated. 14 randomized controlled studies (RCTs) comparing internal fixation with primary arthroplasty may give material for evidence-based decision making.

METHODS

Computerized databases were searched for RCTs published between 1966 and 2004. 14 RCTs containing 2,289 patients were included in a metaanalysis regarding complications, reoperations and mortality. The analysis was performed with software from the Cochrane collaboration.

RESULTS

Primary arthroplasty leads to significantly fewer major method-related hip complications and reoperations, compared to internal fixation. There was no significant difference in mortality between the two groups at 30 days and 1 year. Most of the studies found better function and less pain after primary arthroplasty.

INTERPRETATION

Primary arthroplasty should be used in most patients with displaced femoral neck fracture. The healthy, lucid individual, 70-80 years old, should be given a total hip arthroplasty. The older, impaired or institutionalized patient would benefit from a hemiarthroplasty.

Randomized comparison of reduction and fixation, bipolar hemiarthroplasty, and total hip arthroplasty. Treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in healthy older patients

BACKGROUND

Orthopaedic surgeons vary in their management of displaced intracapsular fractures of the hip in healthy older patients. The aim of this investigation was to determine the functional, clinical, and resource consequences of three different types of surgical treatment.

METHODS

The study was a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Reduction and fixation was compared with bipolar hemiarthroplasty with cement and total hip replacement with cement. Participating surgeons elected to randomize their patients to be treated with either one of the three types of procedures or with either fixation or bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Functional outcomes were measured with a hip-rating questionnaire and the EuroQol health status measure. Clinical outcomes included mortality and complications. The direct health service costs were compared. Participants were followed up for two years.

RESULTS

Two hundred and seven patients were randomized to be treated with one of the three operations, and ninety-one were randomized to be treated with either fixation or bipolar hemiarthroplasty. There were no differences in the mortality rates among the treatment groups. The rate of secondary surgery was highest in the fixation group (39% compared with 5% in the group treated with bipolar hemiarthroplasty and 9% in the group treated with total hip replacement). The fixation group had the worst hip-rating-questionnaire and EuroQol scores at four and twelve months. The total hip replacement group had significantly better functional outcome scores at twenty-four months than the other two groups. Although fixation was initially the least costly procedure, this short-term advantage was eroded by significantly higher costs for subsequent hip-related hospital admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroplasty is more clinically effective and cost-effective than reduction and fixation in healthy older patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. The long-term results of total hip replacement may be better than those of bipolar hemiarthroplasty.

The total costs of a displaced femoral neck fracture: comparison of internal fixation and total hip replacement. A randomised study of 146 hips

We randomised 143 patients--age 75 years or older--with displaced femoral neck fracture to either internal fixation or total hip replacement (THR) and compared the socio-economic consequences. In the internal fixation group, 34 of 78 hips underwent secondary surgery. In the THR group, 12 of 68 hips dislocated, the majority in mentally impaired patients. We calculated the total hospital costs for two years after operation. When secondary surgery was included, there was no difference in costs between the internal fixation and THR groups, or between the mentally impaired and lucid subgroups. The costs to the community were calculated comparing the baseline cost before surgery with the average cost per month during the first postoperative year. No difference was found between the treatment groups. The Harris hip scores were higher in the THR group, and pain was more common in the internal fixation group. In lucid patients, THR gives a better clinical result at the same cost.

Internal fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures in patients older than 70 years

INTRODUCTION

To analyse results and risk factors for osteosynthesis of displaced femoral neck fractures in patients older than 70 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 1992 to 2000, 183 consecutive patients over 70 with displaced femoral neck fractures were treated by closed reduction and fixation with cannulated screws and followed up prospectively for two years. Pain at rest and pain with walking, return to previous functional and walking ability, and need for additional surgery were evaluated.

RESULTS

Six patients died, while 149 were followed up for a minimum of two years: 82 (55%) were asymptomatic, 19 (12.8%) had mild pain, 39 (26.1%) required arthroplasty and 9 (6%) were too ill for further surgery. Poor quality reduction (p=0.008) and poor quality osteosynthesis (p= 0.064) were risk factors for failure. Fifty patients (33.6%) presented with non-union: 6/50 were asymptomatic, 34/50 required arthroplasty, and 10/50 were very ill. Ischaemic necrosis appeared in ten cases (6.7%) (five asymptomatic and five requiring arthroplasty).

CONCLUSIONS

Reduction and fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures achieved good results in 68% of patients over 70, but re-operation became necessary in 32% of them; this made internal fixation advisable only for selected patients who were very active. The main risk factors were poor-quality reduction followed by poor osteosynthesis. (Hip International 2005; 15: 21-6).

Hierarchy of evidence: differences in results between non-randomized studies and randomized trials in patients with femoral neck fractures

INTRODUCTION

There have been a number of non-randomized studies comparing arthroplasty with internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures. However, there remains considerable debate about whether the results of non-randomized studies are consistent with the results of randomized, controlled trials. Given the economic burden of hip fractures, it remains essential to identify therapies to improve outcomes; however, whether data from non-randomized studies of an intervention should be used to guide patient care remains unclear. We aimed to determine whether the pooled results of mortality and revision surgery among non-randomized studies were similar to those of randomized trials in studies comparing arthroplasty with internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a Medline search from 1969 to June 2002, identifying both randomized and non-randomized studies comparing internal fixation with arthroplasty in patients with femoral neck fractures. Additional strategies to identify relevant articles included Cochrane database, SCISEARCH, textbooks, annual meeting programs, and content experts. We abstracted information on mortality and revision rates in each study and compared the pooled results between non-randomized and randomized studies. In addition, we explored potential reasons for dissimilar results between the two study designs.

RESULTS

We identified 140 citations that addressed the general topic of comparison of arthroplasty and internal fixation for hip fracture. Of these, 27 studies met the eligibility criteria, 13 of which were non-randomized studies and 14 of which were randomized trials. Mortality data was available in all 13 non-randomized studies ( n=3108 patients) and in 12 randomized studies ( n=1767 patients). Non-randomized studies overestimated the risk of mortality by 40% when compared with the results of randomized trials (relative risk 1.44 vs 1.04, respectively). Information on revision risk was available in 9 non-randomized studies ( n=2764 patients) and all 14 randomized studies ( n=1901 patients). Both estimates from non-randomized and randomized studies revealed a significant reduction in the risk of revision surgery with arthroplasty compared with internal fixation (relative risk 0.38 vs 0.23, respectively). The reduction in the risk of revision surgery with arthroplasty compared with internal fixation was 62% for non-randomized studies and 77% for randomized trials. Thus, non-randomized studies underestimated the relative benefit of arthroplasty by 19.5%. Non-randomized studies with point estimates of relative risk similar to the pooled estimate for randomized trials all controlled for patient age, gender, and fracture displacement in their comparisons of mortality. We were unable to identify reasons for differences in the revision rate results between the study designs.

CONCLUSIONS

Similar to other reports in medical subspecialties, non-randomized studies provided results dissimilar to randomized trials of arthroplasty vs internal fixation for mortality and revision rates in patients with femoral neck fractures. Investigators should be aware of these discrepancies when evaluating the merits of alternative surgical interventions, especially when both randomized trials and non-randomized comparative studies are available.

Evidence‐based guidelines for fixing broken hips: an update

OBJECTIVE

To update evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of proximal femoral fractures published in the Journal in 1999.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic literature search of MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE from January 1996 to September 2001 and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (most recent issue searched - Issue 2, 2002).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses of all aspects of acute-care hospital treatment and rehabilitation of proximal femoral fractures among subjects aged 50 years and over with proximal femoral fractures not associated with metastatic disease or multiple trauma.

DATA EXTRACTION

All studies were read independently by two reviewers. Reviewers recorded individual study results, and an assessment of study quality and treatment conclusions according to Cochrane Collaboration protocols. If necessary, a third review was performed to reach consensus.

RESULTS

93 new studies were identified and 82 met our inclusion criteria. Recommendations for thromboprophylaxis, anaesthesia, surgical fixation of fractures and nutritional status have been altered to incorporate new evidence. Recommendations have been added regarding postoperative blood transfusion, the management of subtrochanteric fractures, and the type of surgical swabs which should be used.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there have been few significant changes to the previous recommendations, updating the guidelines has required substantial effort. The common clinical problem of hip fracture should be treated according to the most up-to-date evidence to achieve the best possible outcomes and optimal utilisation of limited resources. Guideline updates also require resourcing.

Internal fixation compared with arthroplasty for displaced fractures of the femoral neck. A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal choice for the stabilization of displaced femoral neck fractures remains controversial, with alternatives including arthroplasty and internal fixation. Our objective was to determine the effect of arthroplasty (hemiarthroplasty, bipolar arthroplasty, and total hip arthroplasty), compared with that of internal fixation, on rates of mortality, revision, pain, function, operating time, and wound infection in patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture.

METHODS

We searched computerized databases for randomized clinical trials published between 1969 and 2002, and we identified additional studies through hand searches of major orthopaedic journals, bibliographies of major orthopaedic textbooks, and personal files. Of 140 citations initially identified, fourteen met all eligibility criteria. Three investigators independently graded study quality and abstracted relevant data, including information on revision and mortality rates.

RESULTS

Nine trials, which included a total of 1162 patients, provided detailed information on mortality rates over the first four postoperative months, which ranged from 0% to 20%. We found a trend toward an increase in the relative risk of death in the first four months after arthroplasty compared with the risk in the first four months after internal fixation (relative risk, 1.27). At one year, the relative risk of death was 1.04. The risk of death after arthroplasty appeared to be higher than that after fixation with a compression screw and side-plate but not higher than that after internal fixation with use of screws only (relative risk = 1.75 and 0.86, respectively; p < 0.05). Fourteen trials that included a total of 1901 patients provided data on revision surgery. The relative risk of revision surgery after arthroplasty compared with the risk after internal fixation was 0.23 (p = 0.0003). Pain relief and the attainment of overall good function were similar in patients treated with arthroplasty and those treated with internal fixation (relative risk, 1.12 for pain relief and 0.99 for function). Infection rates ranged from 0% to 18%, and arthroplasty significantly increased the risk of infection (relative risk, 1.81; p = 0.009). In addition, patients who underwent arthroplasty had greater blood loss and longer operative times than those who were treated with internal fixation.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with internal fixation, arthroplasty for the treatment of a displaced femoral neck fracture significantly reduces the risk of revision surgery, at the cost of greater infection rates, blood loss, and operative time and possibly an increase in early mortality rates. Only larger trials will resolve the critical question of the impact on early mortality.

Internal fixation versus arthroplasty for intracapsular proximal femoral fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

Displaced intracapsular fractures may be treated by either reduction and internal fixation which preserves the femoral head, or by replacement of the femoral head with an arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomised trials that have compared internal fixation and arthroplasty.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register (January 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2002), EMBASE (1988 to 2002, Week 2), Current Contents (1993 to 2002, Week 4), PREMEDLINE (January 2002) and selected orthopaedic journals and conference proceedings, and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted trialists where possible.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing internal fixation with arthroplasty for intracapsular hip fractures in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial quality was assessed by use of a 10 item scale. Data from the majority of trials were independently extracted by three reviewers with the remaining extracted by two. Additional information was sought from trialists. After grouping into three broad categories, comparable groups of trials were subgrouped and where appropriate, data were pooled using the fixed effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen trials involving 2091 patients were included. Internal fixation had a reduced length of surgery, operative blood loss, need for blood transfusion and risk of deep wound infection. Arthroplasty had a lower re-operation rate in comparison with fixation. No definite differences for hospital stay, mortality, degree of residual pain, regain of mobility or regain of same residential state were found.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Internal fixation is associated with less initial operative trauma but has an increased risk of re-operation on the hip. Definite conclusions cannot be made for differences in pain and residual disability between the two groups. Future studies should concentrate on better reporting of final outcome measures and there is still a need for studies to define which patient groups are better served by the different treatment methods.

Hip fractures among the elderly: causes, consequences and control

This review examines all pertinent literature sources published in the English language between 1966 to the present concerning hip fracture epidemiology, hip fracture injury mechanisms, and hip fracture management strategies. These data reveal hip fractures have several causes, but among these, the impact of falls and muscle weakness, along with low physical activity levels seems to be the most likely explanation for the rising incidence of hip fracture injuries. Related determinants of suboptimal nutrition, drugs that increase fall risk and lower the safety threshold and comorbid conditions of the neuromuscular system may also contribute to hip fracture disability. A number of interventions may help to prevent hip fracture injuries, including, interventions that optimize bone mass and quality, interventions that help prevent falls and falls dampening interventions. Rehabilitation outcomes may be improved by comprehensive interventions, prolonged follow-up strategies and ensuring that all aging adults enjoy optimal health.

Treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures with total hip arthroplasty: comparison of primary arthroplasty with early salvage arthroplasty after failed internal fixation

BACKGROUND

Closed reduction and internal fixation is the preferred initial treatment for young active patients who sustain a displaced intracapsular hip fracture. However, there is a paucity of information on the outcome in patients in whom this procedure fails and who subsequently require revision to a total hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to compare a group of patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture who required early salvage total hip arthroplasty following failure of internal fixation within the first year after fracture with a group treated with primary total joint replacement for treatment of the same type of fracture.

METHODS

With use of a matched-pairs case-control design, a group of 107 patients, between the ages of sixty and eighty years, who required an early salvage total hip arthroplasty with cement following failed reduction and internal fixation of a displaced intracapsular hip fracture (Group I) was compared with an age and gender-matched group of patients who had undergone total hip arthroplasty with cement as the primary procedure for the treatment of such a fracture (Group II).

RESULTS

During the first year after the arthroplasty, there were fifty-two early complications in thirty-nine patients in Group I and twenty-two complications in fourteen patients in Group II (p < 0.05). There were significantly more superficial infections and dislocations in Group I (p < 0.05). The rate of revision beyond one year was greater and the overall prosthetic survival rate at both five and ten years postoperatively was significantly worse in Group I (log-rank test, p < 0.05). The functional outcomes at one year and at the time of final follow-up were also significantly worse in Group I.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduction and internal fixation will continue to be used as the primary treatment of displaced intracapsular fractures in many younger patients because of the benefits of preservation of the normal hip joint. However, patients should be counseled that if this method of treatment is unsuccessful and requires revision to a total hip arthroplasty with cement, the risk of early complications is higher and hip function may be poorer than if the arthroplasty had been performed as a primary procedure.

Internal fixation versus total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures: a prospective randomized study of 100 hips

100 patients 75 years or older, with displaced femoral neck fractures, were randomly assigned to osteosynthesis with two parallel and percutaneously inserted screws (Olmed) or total hip arthroplasty (Lubinus IP). Mean age was 84 (75-101) years, 74% were women and 45% had mental dysfunction. General complications were commoner in the arthroplasty group but the mortality rates did not differ. In the osteosynthesis group, fracture complications were seen in 27/50 hips. In the arthroplasty group, dislocation was the main complication and occurred in 11/50 cases. At 3 months and after 1 year, the Harris Hip Scores were significantly better in the arthroplasty group. When mental dysfunction was present, the dislocation rate after arthroplasty was 32%, whereas the reoperation rate after osteosynthesis was 5%. The opposite pattern of complications was found in patients with normal mental function, 12% versus 60%. The 2-year mortality rate among those with mental dysfunction was 26/45, compared to 7/55 of those with normal function (p < 0.001). We conclude that total hip arthroplasty should be considered for a displaced femoral neck fracture in old patients with normal mental function and high functional demands.

Internal fixation or arthroplasty for displaced cervical hip fractures in the elderly: a randomised controlled trial of 208 patients

208 patients aged over 70 years with a displaced cervical hip fracture were admitted to a prospective randomised trial of internal fixation using 3 parallel cannulated screws or an uncemented Austin Moore hemiarthroplasty. All surviving patients were followed for a minimum of 3 years. Functional assessment of survivors at 1, 2 and 3 years from injury showed no significant difference between groups. Patients treated by the fixation had a marginally lower mortality rate. Other outcomes which favoured internal fixation were a lower risk of wound infection, reduced length of surgery (22 minutes versus 47 minutes), lower operative blood loss (23 mL versus 172 mL), and lower transfusion requirements (4/102 patients versus 18/106). However, internal fixation had a significantly greater re-admission rate (24/102 versus 7/106) and re-operation rate. Following internal fixation, 44 re-operations were required in 36 patients, while re-operation was required in only 4 patients treated with arthroplasty. The results of this randomised trial indicate that both procedures produce comparable final functional outcomes for the survivors.