The clinical efficacy of proximal femoral nail antirotation and proximal femoral bionic nail in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur in the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.9 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Yaqiang Zhang, Chuangbing Li, Xianqing Shi, Qiuming Gao
{"title":"The clinical efficacy of proximal femoral nail antirotation and proximal femoral bionic nail in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur in the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Yaqiang Zhang, Chuangbing Li, Xianqing Shi, Qiuming Gao","doi":"10.52312/jdrs.2025.2302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and safety of proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFBN) and proximal femoral bionic nail (PFNA) for treating intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients, with the goal of providing evidence-based recommendations for clinicians to select the most suitable internal fixation method.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We conducted a literature search in the CNKI, PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for studies on PFBN and PFNA in treating elderly intertrochanteric femoral fractures, with a search timeframe from database inception to November 2024. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and extracted relevant data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of eight studies were included, involving 506 patients with intertrochanteric femoral fractures, with 225 in the PFBN group and 281 in the PFNA group. The meta-analysis results indicated that the PFBN group had a significantly shorter fracture healing time compared to the PFNA group (mean difference [MD]=-0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.12 to -0.10, p<0.01), an earlier postoperative weight-bearing time (MD=-13.51, 95% CI: -22.38 to -4.64, p<0.01), and a higher Harris Hip Score postoperatively (MD=0.93, 95% CI: 0.01 to 1.86), p<0.05). However, the surgical time in the PFNA group was significantly shorter than that in the PFBN group (MD=6.19, 95% CI: 2.35 to 10.03, p<0.01), and the intraoperative blood loss was also significantly less (MD=9.61, 95% CI: 0.57 to 18.65, p<0.01). There was no significant statistically significant difference in complication rates between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The PFBN group exhibited a significantly shorter fracture healing time, earlier postoperative weight-bearing time, and better hip function after surgery in treating elderly intertrochanteric femoral fractures. However, the surgical time and intraoperative blood loss in the PFBN group were significantly greater than those in the PFNA group. Nonetheless, there were no significant differences in complication rates between the two groups. Therefore, PFBN remains an ideal internal fixation method for treating elderly intertrochanteric femoral fractures.</p>","PeriodicalId":73560,"journal":{"name":"Joint diseases and related surgery","volume":"36 3","pages":"522-534"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12456339/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Joint diseases and related surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52312/jdrs.2025.2302","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluate and compare the clinical efficacy and safety of proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFBN) and proximal femoral bionic nail (PFNA) for treating intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients, with the goal of providing evidence-based recommendations for clinicians to select the most suitable internal fixation method.

Materials and methods: We conducted a literature search in the CNKI, PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases for studies on PFBN and PFNA in treating elderly intertrochanteric femoral fractures, with a search timeframe from database inception to November 2024. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and extracted relevant data.

Results: A total of eight studies were included, involving 506 patients with intertrochanteric femoral fractures, with 225 in the PFBN group and 281 in the PFNA group. The meta-analysis results indicated that the PFBN group had a significantly shorter fracture healing time compared to the PFNA group (mean difference [MD]=-0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.12 to -0.10, p<0.01), an earlier postoperative weight-bearing time (MD=-13.51, 95% CI: -22.38 to -4.64, p<0.01), and a higher Harris Hip Score postoperatively (MD=0.93, 95% CI: 0.01 to 1.86), p<0.05). However, the surgical time in the PFNA group was significantly shorter than that in the PFBN group (MD=6.19, 95% CI: 2.35 to 10.03, p<0.01), and the intraoperative blood loss was also significantly less (MD=9.61, 95% CI: 0.57 to 18.65, p<0.01). There was no significant statistically significant difference in complication rates between the two groups.

Conclusion: The PFBN group exhibited a significantly shorter fracture healing time, earlier postoperative weight-bearing time, and better hip function after surgery in treating elderly intertrochanteric femoral fractures. However, the surgical time and intraoperative blood loss in the PFBN group were significantly greater than those in the PFNA group. Nonetheless, there were no significant differences in complication rates between the two groups. Therefore, PFBN remains an ideal internal fixation method for treating elderly intertrochanteric femoral fractures.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

股骨近端防旋钉与股骨近端仿生钉治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效:系统回顾与meta分析。
目的:在本系统综述和荟萃分析中,我们评估和比较股骨近端防旋钉(PFBN)和股骨近端仿生钉(PFNA)治疗老年患者股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效和安全性,旨在为临床医生选择最合适的内固定方法提供循证建议。材料和方法:我们在CNKI、PubMed、Cochrane和Embase数据库中检索PFBN和PFNA治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的相关文献,检索时间范围为数据库建立至2024年11月。两名审稿人根据纳入和排除标准独立筛选文献并提取相关数据。结果:共纳入8项研究,共纳入506例股骨粗隆间骨折患者,其中PFBN组225例,PFNA组281例。meta分析结果显示,与PFNA组相比,PFBN组骨折愈合时间明显缩短(平均差异[MD]=-0.61, 95%可信区间[CI]: -1.12 ~ -0.10)。结论:PFBN组治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折骨折愈合时间明显缩短,术后承重时间较早,术后髋关节功能较好。然而,PFBN组的手术时间和术中出血量明显大于PFNA组。尽管如此,两组之间的并发症发生率没有显著差异。因此,PFBN仍是治疗老年股骨粗隆间骨折的理想内固定方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信