• Orthop Traumatol Sur · Oct 2016

    Comparative Study

    Unstable intertrochanteric versus displaced femoral neck fractures treated with cementless bipolar hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients; a comparison of 80 matched patients.

    • J-D Chang, I-S Kim, S-S Lee, J-H Yoo, and J-H Hwang.
    • Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 40 Seokwoo-dong, Hwasung 445-907, Republic of Korea.
    • Orthop Traumatol Sur. 2016 Oct 1; 102 (6): 695-9.

    BackgroundWhile hemiarthroplasty (HA) is considered the treatment of choice for displaced femoral neck (FN) fractures in elderly patients, HA has been partly performed as an alternative treatment option for unstable intertrochanteric (IT) fractures. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the risk and availability of HA for unstable IT fractures compared to HA for displaced FN fractures in elderly patients. Therefore, we performed this case-control study to determine whether HA for unstable IT fractures provides clinical results and survival comparable to HA for displaced FN fractures in elderly patients.HypothesisHA for unstable IT fractures in elderly patients provides clinical results and 1-year survival comparable to HA for displaced FN fractures in the same aging group.Materials And MethodsWe identified 80 patients aged 75years or older, who underwent cementless bipolar HA for unstable IT fracture (AO/OTA type 31-A2.2/3 and A3.3). Their clinical results and 1-year survival were compared to the matched control group of 80 patients with displaced FN fractures (Garden type 3 and 4) treated with the same procedure. Perioperative results, postoperative complications, and 1-year survival were investigated between the two groups. Functional outcome was assessed by walking status and Harris hip score (HHS) 6months after surgery.ResultsOperating time was significantly longer in the IT group than the FN group (97.3min [50 to 255] vs. 79.3min [40 to 175], P=0.016). However, the two groups did not significantly differ regarding perioperative results, such as total blood loss, transfusion, intraoperative fracture, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complication. No statistically significant differences in walking status and HHS were observed between the groups. No significant difference in cumulative survival was observed between the two groups (P=0.836), with a 1-year survival rate of 80% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.8 to 87.5) in the IT group and 82% (95% CI, 73.1 to 89.4) in the FN group.ConclusionHA for unstable IT fractures in elderly patients showed clinical results and 1-year survival comparable to HA as the treatment of choice for displaced FN fractures in the same aging group.Level Of EvidenceLevel III, case-control study.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…