股骨近端防旋髓内钉内固定与半髋关节置换治疗高龄不稳定型转子间骨折的Meta分析

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment is an accepted method for intertrochanteric fractures. For the older adults accompanied by severe osteoporosis and other diseases, how to treat intertrochanteric fractures still remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of proximal femoral nail antirotation versus hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures in older adults through meta-analysis. METHODS: According to the Cochrane system evaluation, a computer-based retrieval of Medline, PubMed, SPINGER, John Wiley, Science Direct, EBSCO, CNKI, WanFang, and VIP databases between 2008 and 2018 was performed. The keywords were “proximal femoral nail antirotation or PFNA, hemiarthroplasty, unstable intertrochanteric fractures” in English and Chinese, respectively. The literate was screened based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, and then quality evaluation was conducted. Meta-analysis was undergone on the Rev-Man 5.1 software. RUSULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) Thirteen clinical trials were included, involving 1 223 patients, and including 6 randomized controlled trials. (2) Meta-analysis results showed that the operation time in the proximal femoral nail antirotation group was shorter [MD=-6.54, 95%Cl (-12.81, -0.21), P < 0.01], intraoperative blood loss was lower [MD=-130.83, 95%CI (-190.99, -70.68), P < 0.01], and the incidence of implant complications was higher [RR=2.32, 95%Cl (1.12, 4.84), P < 0.01] compared with the hemiarthroplasty group. (3) In the hemiarthroplasty group, the ambulation time was earlier [MD=18.06, 95%CI (10.3, 25.79), P < 0.000 1], and the Harris scores were increased [MD=-8.19, 95%Cl (-9.45, -6.93), P < 0.01] compared with the proximal femoral nail antirotation group. (4) There was no significant difference in the postoperative complications, hospitalization time or excellent and good rate in Harris scores between two groups (P > 0.05). (5) In summary, the operation time in the proximal femoral nail antirotation group is shorter and the amount of bleeding was less than those in the hemiarthroplasty group, but the incidence of implant complications is higher than that in the hemiarthroplasty group. The hemiarthroplasty group has an advantage in postoperative Harris score and postoperative loading time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]