Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25616914›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2015

Unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Zhiwei Jia, Fan Ding, Yaohong Wu, Wei Li, Haifeng Li, Deli Wang, Qing He, Dike Ruan

Abstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Bipolar versus monopolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femur neck fractures: a meta-analysis study.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Total hip arthroplasty compared to bipolar and unipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced hip fractures in the elderly: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Reasons for revision of failed hemiarthroplasty: Are there any differences between unipolar and bipolar?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2018
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Thompson hemiarthroplastyBone & joint research · 2017
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Zhiwei JiaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Navy General Hospital, Beijing, China. jiazhiwei@139.com.
Fan DingDepartment of Orthopaedics, Wuhan Pu'Ai Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. fandingnavy@163.com.
Yaohong WuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Navy General Hospital, Beijing, China. yaohongwunavy@163.com.
Wei LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Navy General Hospital, Beijing, China. weilinavy@163.com.
Haifeng LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Navy General Hospital, Beijing, China. haifenglinavy@163.com.
Deli WangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Navy General Hospital, Beijing, China. deliwangnavy@163.com.
Qing HeDepartment of Orthopaedics, Navy General Hospital, Beijing, China. heqingngh@163.com.
Dike RuanDepartment of Orthopaedics, Navy General Hospital, Beijing, China. ruandikengh@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BH) for displaced femoral neck fractures has benefit over unipolar hemiarthroplasty (UH) remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the relative effects between BH and UH.

methodsA systematic literature search (up to April, 2014) was conducted to include RCTs comparing BH with UH for displaced femoral neck fractures. Two authors independently assessed methodological quality of the included studies and extracted data. Surgical information and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

resultsA total of 10 RCTs including 1,190 patients were indentified. Our results demonstrated that BH was associated with similar or better outcomes in hip function, hip pain, and quality of life while with a higher cost compared with UH. Moreover, there were no significant differences between BH and UH with regard to operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital stay, mortality, reoperation, dislocation, and complications. BH could significantly decrease the incidence of acetabular erosion at 1 year follow-up compared with UH (RR = 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.06 to 0.89, P = 0.03), but no significant difference was observed at 4 months, 2 years, and 4 years follow-ups.

conclusionsBased on the current evidence, BH is not superior to UH in terms of surgical information and postoperative results. Despite similar or better clinical outcomes compared with UH, BH with a higher cost could not decrease long-term acetabular erosion rate.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyFemoral Neck FracturesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25616914
PMCPMC4334611

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.