Intertrochanteric Fractures in the Elderly Treated with Different Intramedullary Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Comparison Studies.

IF 1.7 Q2 SURGERY

JBJS Reviews Pub Date : 2025-03-25 eCollection Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00203

Noah David Miller, Thomas Cho, Laya Gokula, Jiayong Liu

{"title":"Intertrochanteric Fractures in the Elderly Treated with Different Intramedullary Devices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Comparison Studies.","authors":"Noah David Miller, Thomas Cho, Laya Gokula, Jiayong Liu","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Intertrochanteric fractures in the elderly present significant management challenges, with intramedullary (IM) nails increasingly used for fixation. However, the optimal implant type remains debated. Third-generation IM nails, including proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA), Gamma 3 (G3), and Intertan (IT), feature helical blades, single lag screws, and dual integrated lag screws, respectively. This meta-analysis evaluates functional outcomes, healing status, and complication rates of intertrochanteric fractures treated with these devices.Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar until November 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational comparative studies involving patients older than 65 years were included. Outcomes assessed functional scores, healing status, and complications.Results: Twenty-four studies (6 RCTs, 5 prospective cohort studies, and 13 retrospective cohort studies) involving 2,999 patients were analyzed. The G3, IT, and PFNA groups included 617, 1,124, and 1,258 patients, respectively. Results showed similar functional recovery across devices. Perioperative parameters favored PFNA, while IT demonstrated lower complication and revision rates. No outcomes favored G3, suggesting it is interchangeable with other devices. PFNA was easier to use and required shorter operation times but had higher cutout and revision rates. IT, despite longer operation times, promoted faster fracture healing and had fewer complications. G3 did not outperform other devices in any measured outcome.Conclusion: PFNA, G3, and IT provide comparable functional outcomes and overall complication rates, making device selection largely dependent on surgeon preference. However, IT may be the superior choice for complex fractures requiring more excellent stability due to its lower complication and revision rates. This analysis highlights the importance of tailoring implant selection to individual patient needs and fracture complexity.Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.","PeriodicalId":47098,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Reviews","volume":"13 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.24.00203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Intertrochanteric fractures in the elderly present significant management challenges, with intramedullary (IM) nails increasingly used for fixation. However, the optimal implant type remains debated. Third-generation IM nails, including proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA), Gamma 3 (G3), and Intertan (IT), feature helical blades, single lag screws, and dual integrated lag screws, respectively. This meta-analysis evaluates functional outcomes, healing status, and complication rates of intertrochanteric fractures treated with these devices.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar until November 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational comparative studies involving patients older than 65 years were included. Outcomes assessed functional scores, healing status, and complications.

Results: Twenty-four studies (6 RCTs, 5 prospective cohort studies, and 13 retrospective cohort studies) involving 2,999 patients were analyzed. The G3, IT, and PFNA groups included 617, 1,124, and 1,258 patients, respectively. Results showed similar functional recovery across devices. Perioperative parameters favored PFNA, while IT demonstrated lower complication and revision rates. No outcomes favored G3, suggesting it is interchangeable with other devices. PFNA was easier to use and required shorter operation times but had higher cutout and revision rates. IT, despite longer operation times, promoted faster fracture healing and had fewer complications. G3 did not outperform other devices in any measured outcome.

Conclusion: PFNA, G3, and IT provide comparable functional outcomes and overall complication rates, making device selection largely dependent on surgeon preference. However, IT may be the superior choice for complex fractures requiring more excellent stability due to its lower complication and revision rates. This analysis highlights the importance of tailoring implant selection to individual patient needs and fracture complexity.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

JBJS Reviews SURGERY-

CiteScore

4.40

自引率

4.30%

发文量

132

期刊介绍： JBJS Reviews is an innovative review journal from the publishers of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. This continuously published online journal provides comprehensive, objective, and authoritative review articles written by recognized experts in the field. Edited by Thomas A. Einhorn, MD, and a distinguished Editorial Board, each issue of JBJS Reviews, updates the orthopaedic community on important topics in a concise, time-saving manner, providing expert insights into orthopaedic research and clinical experience. Comprehensive reviews, special features, and integrated CME provide orthopaedic surgeons with valuable perspectives on surgical practice and the latest advances in the field within twelve subspecialty areas: Basic Science, Education & Training, Elbow, Ethics, Foot & Ankle, Hand & Wrist, Hip, Infection, Knee, Oncology, Pediatrics, Pain Management, Rehabilitation, Shoulder, Spine, Sports Medicine, Trauma.