Meta analysis of cemented versus non-cemented hemiarthroplasty for intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-134X.2018.06.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of cemented and non-cemented hemiarthroplasty for intertrochanteric fracture in the elderly patients using meta-analysis.

Methods

Related randomized controlled trials about cemented and non-cemented hemiarthroplasty for intertrochanteric fracture in the elderly patientsliterature were collected by computerized search of online database including Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed, Ovid, EMBASE, CBM, CNKI, Articles, VIP and other database; the search period was set as from establish of the database to January 2018, and by manual search of Chinese Medical Journal and other orthopedics journals in the last five years.The quality of trials was strictly assessed. RevMan 5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collabiration was used for data analysis.

Results

Seventeen RCTs involving 1 233 patients were finally enrolled.According to the meta-analysis, compared with the cement group, the non-cement group had shorter operation time[MD=8.20, 95%CI (7.09 , 9.03 ) , P<0.01], lower mortality[OR=2.45, 95%CI (1.11, 5.41), P=0.03], but more blood loss after operation[MD=-13.23, 95%CI (-20.70 , -5.76 ) , P=0.0005], and there was no significant difference in the bleeding volume, ambulation time, Harris score of hip function at six months and 12 months, prosthetic complication, cardiovascular complication, infection and deep venous thrombosis between the two surgical methods(P>0.05).

Conlusion

For intertrochanteric fracture in the elderly patients, the non-cemented hemiarthroplasty is superior to cemented hemiarthroplasty in terms of operation time and mortality, but more postoperative bleeding.

Key words: Hip fractures, Aged, Arthroplasty, repalcement, hip, Cement

Dong Gong, Jing Zhao, Jun Liu, Yinshuan Deng, Ping Zhen. Meta analysis of cemented versus non-cemented hemiarthroplasty for intertrochanteric fracture in elderly patients[J]. Chinese Journal of Joint Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2018, 12(06): 777-785.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhgjwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-134X.2018.06.007

https://zhgjwkzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2018/V12/I06/777

Figures/Tables 12

References 28

[1]	唐佩福．股骨转子间骨折的治疗进展与策略[J]．中华创伤骨科杂志，2017，19(2)：93-94.
[2]	张长青．关于老年股骨转子间骨折的当代观点[J]．中华骨科杂志，2012，32(7)：611-613.
[3]	谷鸿秋，王杨，李卫．Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具在随机对照研究Meta分析中的应用[J]．中国循环杂志，2014，29(2)：147-148.
[4]	Cankaya D, Ozkurt B, Tabak AY. Cemented calcar replacement versus cementless hemiarthroplasty for unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures in the elderly[J]. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg, 2013, 19(6): 548-553.
[5]	卢强．水泥与非水泥股骨头置换治疗高龄股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效对比[J]．中国矫形外科杂志，2016，24(24)：2237-2241.
[6]	孙轶夫．生物型假体治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效分析[D]．长春：吉林大学，2016.
[7]	申文瑞，唐风，车贵义，等．人工关节置换治疗老年转子间骨折患者的临床疗效对比[J]．中国临床医生，2013，41(6)：44-46.
[8]	闫文龙，杨小中，张华，等．生物型与骨水泥型人工髋关节置换治疗高龄转子间骨折早期疗效的比较[J]．创伤外科杂志，2015(1)：28-32.
[9]	王军，马世云，李龙杰．生物型半髋置换和骨水泥半髋置换治疗高龄转子间骨折的随访比较[J]．中国老年学杂志，2014，34(16)：4536-4538.
[10]	李博，田晓滨，孙立，等．骨水泥型与生物型加长柄人工髋关节置换术治疗高龄不稳定股骨转子间骨折的疗效比较[J]．中华创伤杂志，2016，32(6)：527-532.
[11]	江海良，郭开今，王翔，等．生物型与骨水泥型假体半髋置换治疗老年不稳定性股骨转子间骨折的比较[J]．中国组织工程研究，2017，21(23)：3622-3627.
[12]	李宏伟，贺加明．骨水泥型与生物型加长柄人工关节置换术在老年不稳定性股骨转子间骨折的疗效对比[J]．广西医科大学学报，2017，34(9)：1367-1369.
[13]	于铁淼，苗会玲．骨水泥型与生物型髋关节假体置入修复老年不稳定股骨转子间骨折的疗效及安全性：前瞻性、非随机对照临床试验[J]．中国组织工程研究，2017，21(15)：2308-2313.
[14]	杨德兵，黄纯聪．生物型与骨水泥型人工髋关节置换治疗高龄转子间骨折的临床分析[J]．深圳中西医结合杂志，2015，25(21)：23-24.
[15]	何君源．生物型与骨水泥型人工髋关节置换治疗高龄转子间骨折的临床效果对比分析[J]．吉林医学，2017，38(4)：740-741.
[16]	曾健聪，沈友任，林卓峰．骨水泥型人工髋关节置换治疗对高龄股骨转子间骨折患者关节功能及生活质量的影响[J]. 中国医学创新，2016(5)：38-42.
[17]	曾庆强，郑志辉．生物型与骨水泥型人工股骨头置换术治疗高龄粗隆间骨折的疗效比较[J]．广东医学，2013，34(15)：2371-2373.
[18]	曾俊．骨水泥型与生物型加长柄人工关节置换治疗高龄不稳定性股骨粗隆间骨折疗效比较[D]．重庆：重庆医科大学，2009.
[19]	郭得辛，王明礼，宋志勇，等．远端稳定的生物型人工股骨头置换治疗老年转子间骨折的临床疗效[J]．中国老年学杂志，2016，36(4)：912-914.
[20]	于晓光．水泥型及生物型长柄人工关节在治疗老年性股骨转子间不稳定性骨折的疗效比较[D]．石家庄：河北医科大学，2014.
[21]	Dash SK, Panigrahi R, Palo N, et al. Fragility hip fractures in elderly patients in bhubaneswar, India(2012－2014)：a prospective multicenter study of 1031 elderly patients[J]. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil, 2015, 6(1): 11-15.
[22]	Chehade MJ, Carbone T, Awward D, et al. Influence of fracture stability on early patient mortality and reoperation after pertrochanteric and intertrochanteric hip fractures[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2015, 29(12): 538-543.
[23]	Grimsrud C, Monzon RJ, Richman J, et al. Cemented hip arthroplasty with a novel cerclage cable technique for unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2005, 20(3): 337-343.
[24]	吴海山．科学审慎对待人工关节置换术治疗股骨粗隆间骨折[J]．中国骨与关节损伤杂志，2009，24(9)：769-769.
[25]	Heijnens LJ, Schotanus MG, Kort NP, et al. Results of cemented anatomically adapted total hip arthroplasty a follow-up longer than 10 years [J]. J Arthroplasty, 2016, 31(1): 194-198.
[26]	Griffiths R, White SM, Moppett IK, et al. Safety guideline: reducing the risk from cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture 2015[J]. Anaesthesia, 2015, 70(5): 623-626.
[27]	关振鹏，吕厚山，陈彦章，等．影响人工关节置换术后下肢深静脉血栓形成的临床风险因素分析[J]．中华外科杂志，2005，43(20)：1317-1320.
[28]	Göçer H, Coşkun S, Karaismailoğlu N. Comparison of treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fracture with different arthroplasty methods[J]. Niger Med J, 2016, 57(2): 81-85.

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export