Does intramedullary nail have advantages over dynamic hip screw for the treatment of AO/OTA31A1-A3? A meta-analysis.

backgroundHip fractures are still unsolved problems nowadays. We evaluated the functional outcomes and complications in the treatment of hip fractures (AO/OTA31A1-A3) to find potential difference and risk between intramedullary nail (IMN) and dynamic hip screw (DHS).

methodWe searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library up to 19 June 2023 and retrieved any studies comparing IMN and DHS in treatment of Hip fractures. The main outcomes and complications were extracted from the included studies. The fixed-effect model was selected to pool the data for homogeneous studies (I

results30 RCT studies were included in this meta-analysis. There were significant difference of in the items of blood loss, screening time, femoral neck shortening, non-union, and femoral fractures (p < 0.05). Significant difference was found in the parameter of open reduction of fracture after sensitive analysis (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found in the parameter of Mobility Score at the last follow-up after sensitive analysis (p ≥ 0.05). There was no significant difference in the parameters of open reduction of fracture, required blood transfusion, mean surgical time, hospital stays, time to healing, mean Harris Hip Score, infection, cut out, poor reduction, breakage of implant, failure of fixation, reoperation, and systemic complications of chest infection, decubital ulcer, urinary tract infection and persistent pain in the hip (p ≥ 0.05).

conclusionsOur meta-analysis revealed that hip fractures treated with IMN have merits with lower rate of blood loss, femoral neck shortening and non-union; shortcoming of increased risk of femoral fractures. It is suggested that special attention should be paid to the risk of femoral fracture when intramedullary nail was inserted in the intraoperative.