A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Comparison of helical blade versus lag screw in intertrochanteric fractures of the elderly treated with proximal femoral nail: A meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials. | LitMetric

Objectives: In this review, we aimed to compare the radiological and functional outcomes between the helical blade and lag screw in treating intertrochanteric fractures among the elderly and to provide suggestions for clinical treatment.

Materials And Methods: Between January 1, 1990 and January 12, 2022, the literature search in document databases identified eligible randomized-controlled trials (RCT) studies directly comparing the helical blade and lag screws for treating hip fractures. The mechanical failure rates, the excellent and good rate of fracture reduction, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and postoperative hip pain of two intramedullary devices (helical blades versus lag screws) in patients with intertrochanteric fractures were analyzed using the RevMan software and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The random-effects models were used for statistical analysis.

Results: A total of 11 articles containing 1,146 patients for helical blade and lag screw comparison were included. Compared to the lag screws, the mechanical failure rate (odds ratio [OR]=0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40-1.27, p=0.25), the excellent and good rate of fracture reduction (OR=1.33, 95% CI: 0.61-2.90, p=0.48), HHS (mean differences 1.83, 95% CI: -0.29-1.83, p=0.09), and postoperative hip pain (OR=0.41, 95% CI: 0.14-1.21, p=0.11) were similar with the helical blades. There was no significant difference between the two implants in terms of the treatment outcomes.

Conclusion: Both helical blades and lag screws are good choices for treating intertrochanteric fracture among elderly.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9647664PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.52312/jdrs.2022.789DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

helical blade
16
lag screws
16
lag screw
12
intertrochanteric fractures
12
blade lag
12
helical blades
12
versus lag
8
fractures elderly
8
randomized-controlled trials
8
treating intertrochanteric
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!