Review: Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation in Elderly Patients With Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Restricted accessReview articleFirst published online June, 2011
Review: Minimally Invasive Versus Conventional Dynamic Hip Screw Fixation in Elderly Patients With Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
The classic dynamic hip screw fixation of intertrochanteric fractures may be associated with significant blood loss and soft tissue damage, which may worsen existing comorbidities of frail elderly patients. Recently, minimally invasive dynamic hip screw (MIDHS) technique was developed for osteosynthesis of intertrochanteric fractures. A highly sensitive search strategy was used to identify all published randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials (RCTs/ qRCTs) and comparative observational studies comparing the MIDHS technique with the conventional dynamic hip screw (CDHS) technique in patients with intertrochanteric fractures. A pooled estimate of effect size was produced using both random and fixed effects models. Four RCTs/qRCTs and 2 retrospective comparative studies were identified. The MIDHS technique resulted in less blood loss, shorter hospitalization, lower pain level, faster fracture healing, and better hip function when compared with the CDHS technique. There was no significance difference between the 2 groups with regard to postoperative complications and implant position. The MIDHS technique may achieve perioperative benefits when compared with the CDHS technique.
Verettas DA, Ifantidis P., Chatzipapas CN, et al. Systematic effects of surgical treatment of hip fractures: gliding screw-plating vs intramedullary nailing. Injury. 2010;41:279-284.
2.
Anglen JO, Weinstein JN; American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Research Committee.Nail or plate fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures: changing pattern of practice. A review of the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Database . J Bone Joint Surg Am.2008;90:700-707.
3.
Lee YS, Huang HL, Lo TY, Huang CRDynamic hip screw in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures: a comparison of two fixation methods. Int Orthop. 2007;31:683-688.
4.
Morris AH, Zuckerman JDNational consensus conference on improving the continuum of care for patients with hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 ;84:670-674.
5.
Alobaid A., Harvey EJ, Elder GM, Lander P., Guy P., Reindl R.Minimally invasive dynamic hip screw: prospective randomized trial of two techniques of insertion of a standard dynamic fixation device. J Orthop Trauma. 2004;18:207-212.
6.
Ho M., Garau G., Walley G., et al. Minimally invasive dynamic hip screw for fixation of hip fractures . Int Orthop. 2009;33:555-560.
7.
Wong TC, Chiu Y., Tsang WL, Leung WY, Yeung SHA double-blind, prospective, randomised, controlled clinical trial of minimally invasive dynamic hip screw fixation of intertrochanteric fractures. Injury. 2009;40:422-427.
8.
Wang JP, Yang TF, Kong QQ, et al. Minimally invasive technique versus conventional technique of dynamic hip screws for intertrochanteric femoral fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010;130:613-620.
9.
Wang J., Yang T., Kong Q., et al. Treatment of aged intertrochanteric fractures with minimally invasive dynamic hip screws. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2009;23:1071-1074.
10.
Kuzyk PR, Guy P., Kreder HJ, Zdero R., McKee MD, Schemitsch EHMinimally invasive hip fracture surgery: are outcomes better? J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23:447-453.
Leung WY, Tsang WLConventional muscle-reflection approach versus mini-incision muscle-splitting approach in dynamic hip screw fixation. J Orthop Surg ( Hong Kong). 2008;16:156-161.
13.
Chong KW, Wong MK, Rikhraj IS, Howe TSThe use of computer navigation in performing minimally invasive surgery for intertrochanteric hip fractures-the experience in Singapore. Injury. 2006;37:755-762.
14.
DiPaola M., Rozbruch SR, Helfet DLMinimal incision technique using a two-hole plate for fixation of stable intertrochanteric hip fractures. Orthopedics. 2004;27:270-274.
15.
Mahmood A., Zafar MS, Majid I., Maffulli N., Thompson J.Minimally invasive hip arthroplasty: a quantitative review of the literature . Br Med Bull. 2007;84:37-48.
16.
Coleman BD, Khan KM, Maffulli N., Cook JL, Wark JDStudies of surgical outcome after patellar tendinopathy: clinical significance of methodological deficiencies and guidelines for future studies. Victorian Institute of Sport Tendon Study Group. Scand J Med Sci Sports . 2000;10:2-11.
17.
Higgins JP, Thompson SGQuantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539-1558.
Jiang SD, Jiang LS, Zhao CQ, Dai LYNo advantages of Gamma nail over sliding hip screw in the management of peritrochanteric hip fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30:493-497.
20.
Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DMIntramedullary versus extramedullary fixation for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;348:87-94.
21.
Saarenpää I., Heikkinen T., Ristiniemi J., Hyvönen P., Leppilahti J., Jalovaara P.Functional comparison of the dynamic hip screw and the Gamma locking nail in trochanteric hip fractures: a matched-pair study of 268 patients. Int Orthop. 2009;33:255-260.
22.
Parker MJ, Handoll HHGamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.2008;(16):CD000093.
23.
Peyser A., Weil Y., Brocke L., Manor O., Mosheiff R., Liebergall M.Percutaneous compression plating versus compression hip screw fixation for the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Injury. 2005;36:1343-1349.
24.
Hsueh KK, Fang CK, Chen CM, Su YP, Wu HF, Chiu FYRisk factors in cutout of sliding hip screw in intertrochanteric fractures: an evaluation of 937 patients. Int Orthop. 2010;34:1273-1276.
25.
Güven M., Yavuz U., Kadıoğlu B., et al. Importance of screw position in intertrochanteric femoral fractures treated by dynamic hip screw. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2010;96:21-27.
26.
Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi JMThe value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1058-1064.
27.
Herman A., Dekel A., Botser IB, Steinberg ELComputer-assisted surgery for dynamic hip screw, using Surgix, a novel intraoperative guiding system. Int J Med Robot. 2009;5:45-50.
28.
Yian EH, Banerji I., Matthews LSOptimal side plate fixation for unstable intertrochanteric hip fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 1997;11:254-259.
29.
Egol KA, Koval KJ Hip: trauma. In: Koval KJ, ed. Orthopaedic Knowledge Update 7. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 2002:407-416.
30.
McLoughlin SW, Wheeler DL, Rider J., Bolhofner B.Biomechanical evaluation of the dynamic hip screw with two- and four-hole side plates. J Orthop Trauma . 2000; 14:318-323.
31.
Laohapoonrungsee A., Arpornchayanon O., Phornputkul C.Two-hole side-plate DHS in the treatment of intertrochanteric fracture: results and complications . Injury. 2005;36:1355-1360.
32.
Bolhofner BR , Russo PR, Carmen B.Results of intertrochanteric femur fractures treated with a 135-degree sliding screw with a two-hole side plate. J Orthop Trauma. 1999;13:5-8.
33.
Carr AJEvidence-based orthopaedic surgery: what type of research will best improve clinical practice? J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 ;87:1593-1594.
34.
Cowan J., Lozano-Calderón S., Ring D.Quality of prospective controlled randomized trials: analysis of trials of treatment for lateral epicondylitis as an example. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1693-1699.
