Key result
Integrated compression screw nails significantly reduced the risk of implant-related failures by 81% (OR 0.19) compared to single screw nails in patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures.
Meta-Analysis (n=1,661)
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports preferring integrated compression screw nails in intertrochanteric fractures; extends prior trial data via meta-analysis.
Background: Surgical treatment is the optimal strategy for managing intertrochanteric fractures as it allows early rehabilitation and functional recovery.We sought to assess the clinical effectiveness of commonly used intramedullary devices for the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures and also assess if there was a class effect of these nails.Methods: A comprehensive systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies was conducted comparing an Integrated Compression Screw nail (ICS) with conventional single screw nails using a single lag screw (SLS) or a single helical blade (SHB).We assessed the following outcomes, device related complications (shaft fracture, varus collapse and cut-outs), revisions, non-unions, hip and thigh pain, Harris Hip Score, health related quality of life, operating and fluoroscopy time, blood loss and other complications.We report odds ratios for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference for continuous outcomes.Results: Twelve studies with 1,661 patients were included, 8 comparing ICS with SHB and 4 comparing ICS with SLS.Mean age was 76 years and 71% of patients were female.There were significant differences (p<0.05) in device performance in favour of ICS for implant related failures, fewer revisions, hip and thigh pain and better function as measured by SF-36 and HHS compared to single screw nails.Operating time and fluoroscopy time significantly favoured single screw nails.No differences were seen in non-unions, blood loss, and other complications.Conclusion: Our meta-analysis suggests that there are significant differences between ICS and the single screw nails in favour of ICS with respect to the incidence of implant related failures, revision, functional outcomes and proportion of patients reporting hip and thigh pain.Operating time favours the single screw nails while no differences were observed regarding non-unions, blood loss and other complications.There is no evidence of class effect regarding intrameduallary nails in this patient population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
LM et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis in Intertrochanteric hip fractures (n=1,661). Integrated Compression Screw nail (ICS) vs. Single screw nails (single lag screw or single helical blade) was evaluated on Implant related failures (cut out, varus collapse, and shaft fractures) (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.29, p=<0.00001). Integrated compression screw nails significantly reduced the risk of implant-related failures by 81% (OR 0.19) compared to single screw nails in patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: