Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if there was a difference in the risk of post-operative complications associated with the use of different intramedullary (IM) devices in the treatment of unstable AO OTA 31-A trochanteric fractures. DESIGN: Systematic literature review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic literature review was carried out in January 2022 in the Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases. Studies comparing INTERTAN™ to other intramedullary nails for the treatment of AO OTA 31-A trochanteric fractures were selected for inclusion. After data extraction, meta-analyses were carried out on postoperative outcomes, with specific focus placed on unstable fracture patterns. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were suitable for inclusion, of which seventeen reported on outcomes in unstable fractures. INTERTAN reduced the risk of revision/reoperation by 64% (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.54, p <0.0001), implant failures by 62% (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.57, p<0.0001) and hip and thigh pain by 50% (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.71, p=0.0001) in unstable fractures. No differences were noted between IM nail designs for infection rates, healing time, non-union rates, femoral shortening, or Harris Hip Score. CONCLUSIONS: The INTERTAN IM nail may reduce incidence of implant-related complications, hip and thigh pain, and the need for revision/reoperation without compromising clinical and functional outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Quartley et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: