Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Background. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to find out whether the proximal femoral nail was better than the dynamic hip screw in the treatment of trochanteric fractures with respect to operation time, blood transfusion, hospital stay, wound complications, number of reoperation, and mortality...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2013-01-01
|
| Series: | The Scientific World Journal |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/805805 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832548609893072896 |
|---|---|
| author | Xiao Huang Frankie Leung Zhou Xiang Pei-Yong Tan Jing Yang Dai-Qing Wei Xi Yu |
| author_facet | Xiao Huang Frankie Leung Zhou Xiang Pei-Yong Tan Jing Yang Dai-Qing Wei Xi Yu |
| author_sort | Xiao Huang |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to find out whether the proximal femoral nail was better than the dynamic hip screw in the treatment of trochanteric fractures with respect to operation time, blood transfusion, hospital stay, wound complications, number of reoperation, and mortality rate. Methods. All randomized controlled trials comparing proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw in the treatment of trochanteric fractures were included. Articles and conference data were extracted by two authors independently. Data was analyzed using RevMan 5.1 version. Eight trials involving 1348 fractures were retrieved. Results. Compared with DHS fixation, PFN fixation had similar operation time (95% CI: −15.28–2.40, P=0.15). Blood loss and transfusion during perioperative time were also comparable between the two fixations (95% CI: −301.39–28.11, P=0.10; 95% CI: −356.02–107.20, P=0.29, resp.). Outcomes of hospital stay (95% CI: −0.62–1.01, P=0.64), wound complication (95% CI: 0.66–1.67, P=0.82), mortality (95% CI: 0.83–1.30, P=0.72), and reoperation (95% CI: 0.61–1.54, P=0.90) were all similar between the two groups. Conclusion. PFN fixation shows the same effectiveness as DHS fixation in the parameters measured. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-6fd4c848912946e5ae9781c925ecb7f5 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1537-744X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2013-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | The Scientific World Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-6fd4c848912946e5ae9781c925ecb7f52025-02-03T06:13:38ZengWileyThe Scientific World Journal1537-744X2013-01-01201310.1155/2013/805805805805Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsXiao Huang0Frankie Leung1Zhou Xiang2Pei-Yong Tan3Jing Yang4Dai-Qing Wei5Xi Yu6Department of Orthopaedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, ChinaDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Hong KongDepartment of Orthopaedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, ChinaDepartment of Orthopaedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, ChinaDepartment of Orthopaedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, ChinaDepartment of Orthopaedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, ChinaDepartment of Orthopaedics, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, No. 37 Guoxue Xiang, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, ChinaBackground. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to find out whether the proximal femoral nail was better than the dynamic hip screw in the treatment of trochanteric fractures with respect to operation time, blood transfusion, hospital stay, wound complications, number of reoperation, and mortality rate. Methods. All randomized controlled trials comparing proximal femoral nail and dynamic hip screw in the treatment of trochanteric fractures were included. Articles and conference data were extracted by two authors independently. Data was analyzed using RevMan 5.1 version. Eight trials involving 1348 fractures were retrieved. Results. Compared with DHS fixation, PFN fixation had similar operation time (95% CI: −15.28–2.40, P=0.15). Blood loss and transfusion during perioperative time were also comparable between the two fixations (95% CI: −301.39–28.11, P=0.10; 95% CI: −356.02–107.20, P=0.29, resp.). Outcomes of hospital stay (95% CI: −0.62–1.01, P=0.64), wound complication (95% CI: 0.66–1.67, P=0.82), mortality (95% CI: 0.83–1.30, P=0.72), and reoperation (95% CI: 0.61–1.54, P=0.90) were all similar between the two groups. Conclusion. PFN fixation shows the same effectiveness as DHS fixation in the parameters measured.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/805805 |
| spellingShingle | Xiao Huang Frankie Leung Zhou Xiang Pei-Yong Tan Jing Yang Dai-Qing Wei Xi Yu Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials The Scientific World Journal |
| title | Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
| title_full | Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
| title_fullStr | Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
| title_full_unstemmed | Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
| title_short | Proximal Femoral Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation for Trochanteric Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials |
| title_sort | proximal femoral nail versus dynamic hip screw fixation for trochanteric fractures a meta analysis of randomized controlled trials |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/805805 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT xiaohuang proximalfemoralnailversusdynamichipscrewfixationfortrochantericfracturesametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT frankieleung proximalfemoralnailversusdynamichipscrewfixationfortrochantericfracturesametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT zhouxiang proximalfemoralnailversusdynamichipscrewfixationfortrochantericfracturesametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT peiyongtan proximalfemoralnailversusdynamichipscrewfixationfortrochantericfracturesametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT jingyang proximalfemoralnailversusdynamichipscrewfixationfortrochantericfracturesametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT daiqingwei proximalfemoralnailversusdynamichipscrewfixationfortrochantericfracturesametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials AT xiyu proximalfemoralnailversusdynamichipscrewfixationfortrochantericfracturesametaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials |