股骨颈下外翻性骨折:系统综述、荟萃分析以及原位固定与非手术治疗的成本分析。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
HIP International Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-21 DOI:10.1177/11207000231210240
Herv Vidakovic, David Kieser, Gary Hooper, Chris Frampton, Michael Wyatt
{"title":"股骨颈下外翻性骨折:系统综述、荟萃分析以及原位固定与非手术治疗的成本分析。","authors":"Herv Vidakovic, David Kieser, Gary Hooper, Chris Frampton, Michael Wyatt","doi":"10.1177/11207000231210240","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The management of the valgus-impacted neck of femur fracture (AO/OTA 31-B1) remains contentious. The objective of this study was to determine whether operative intervention is cost-effective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review using electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Ebsco, Scholar) identifying studies published in the English language concerning valgus-impacted neck of femur fractures until June 2022. Additional studies were identified through hand searches of major orthopaedic journals, and bibliographies of major orthopaedic textbooks. MeSH terms (hip fracture and femoral neck fracture) and keywords (undisplaced, valgus-impacted, valgus, subcapital, Garden) connected by the Boolean operators \"AND\" and \"OR\" were used to identify studies. 2 reviewers independently extracted the data using standardised forms and recording spreadsheet. Methodological validity prior to inclusion in the review using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument. Meta-analysis was undertaken. Outcome measures were rate of displacement, avascular necrosis, non-union, mortality and requirement of further operative intervention. A cost utility analysis was then conducted to compare the 2 groups on the basis of the cost of initial treatment and the potential requirement of secondary intervention to hemiarthroplasty.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>47 studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis data demonstrated a significant difference in the displacement rate of 22.8% and 2.8% between the nonoperative and internal fixation groups respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.05). The overall incidence of further operative intervention for each group was 23% and 10% respectively. There was no significant difference with respect to avascular necrosis, mortality or union rates. The cost utility analysis revealed nonoperative management to be approximately 60% more costly than initial internal fixation when the costs of subsequent surgery were included.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis of the existing literature concludes that whilst nonoperative management is possible for valgus impacted neck of femur fractures, it is associated with higher complication rates and greater expense than management by internal fixation.</p>","PeriodicalId":12911,"journal":{"name":"HIP International","volume":" ","pages":"260-269"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10935617/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Valgus-impacted subcapital neck of femur fractures: a systematic review, meta-analysis with cost analysis of fixation <i>in-situ</i> versus nonoperative management.\",\"authors\":\"Herv Vidakovic, David Kieser, Gary Hooper, Chris Frampton, Michael Wyatt\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/11207000231210240\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The management of the valgus-impacted neck of femur fracture (AO/OTA 31-B1) remains contentious. The objective of this study was to determine whether operative intervention is cost-effective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review using electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Ebsco, Scholar) identifying studies published in the English language concerning valgus-impacted neck of femur fractures until June 2022. Additional studies were identified through hand searches of major orthopaedic journals, and bibliographies of major orthopaedic textbooks. MeSH terms (hip fracture and femoral neck fracture) and keywords (undisplaced, valgus-impacted, valgus, subcapital, Garden) connected by the Boolean operators \\\"AND\\\" and \\\"OR\\\" were used to identify studies. 2 reviewers independently extracted the data using standardised forms and recording spreadsheet. Methodological validity prior to inclusion in the review using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument. Meta-analysis was undertaken. Outcome measures were rate of displacement, avascular necrosis, non-union, mortality and requirement of further operative intervention. A cost utility analysis was then conducted to compare the 2 groups on the basis of the cost of initial treatment and the potential requirement of secondary intervention to hemiarthroplasty.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>47 studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis data demonstrated a significant difference in the displacement rate of 22.8% and 2.8% between the nonoperative and internal fixation groups respectively (<i>p</i> = 0.05). The overall incidence of further operative intervention for each group was 23% and 10% respectively. There was no significant difference with respect to avascular necrosis, mortality or union rates. The cost utility analysis revealed nonoperative management to be approximately 60% more costly than initial internal fixation when the costs of subsequent surgery were included.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis of the existing literature concludes that whilst nonoperative management is possible for valgus impacted neck of femur fractures, it is associated with higher complication rates and greater expense than management by internal fixation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"HIP International\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"260-269\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10935617/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"HIP International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000231210240\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HIP International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/11207000231210240","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:股骨颈外翻撞击性骨折(AO/OTA 31-B1)的处理仍存在争议。本研究旨在确定手术干预是否具有成本效益:我们使用电子数据库(Medline、Embase、Cochrane、Ebsco、Scholar)进行了系统性回顾,确定了截至 2022 年 6 月以英文发表的有关股骨颈外翻撞击性骨折的研究。通过手工检索主要骨科期刊和主要骨科教科书书目,还发现了其他研究。使用MeSH术语(髋部骨折和股骨颈骨折)和关键词(未置换、外翻-撞击、外翻、骨盆下、花园),并用布尔运算符 "AND "和 "OR "连接,以确定研究。两名审稿人使用标准化表格和记录电子表格独立提取数据。在纳入综述之前,使用乔安娜-布里格斯研究所《统计评估和综述工具》中的标准化批判性评估工具进行方法学验证。进行了 Meta 分析。结果测量指标包括移位率、血管坏死率、不愈合率、死亡率和进一步手术干预的要求。然后进行了成本效用分析,根据初始治疗的成本和对半关节成形术进行二次干预的潜在要求对两组进行比较:结果:47 项研究符合纳入标准。元分析数据显示,非手术组和内固定组的移位率分别为22.8%和2.8%,差异显著(P = 0.05)。两组进一步手术干预的总体发生率分别为 23% 和 10%。两组在血管性坏死、死亡率和骨结合率方面没有明显差异。成本效用分析显示,如果将后续手术的成本计算在内,非手术治疗的成本比初次内固定治疗高出约60%:这项对现有文献进行的荟萃分析得出结论,虽然非手术治疗股骨颈外翻骨折是可行的,但与内固定治疗相比,非手术治疗的并发症发生率更高,费用也更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Valgus-impacted subcapital neck of femur fractures: a systematic review, meta-analysis with cost analysis of fixation in-situ versus nonoperative management.

Background: The management of the valgus-impacted neck of femur fracture (AO/OTA 31-B1) remains contentious. The objective of this study was to determine whether operative intervention is cost-effective.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review using electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Ebsco, Scholar) identifying studies published in the English language concerning valgus-impacted neck of femur fractures until June 2022. Additional studies were identified through hand searches of major orthopaedic journals, and bibliographies of major orthopaedic textbooks. MeSH terms (hip fracture and femoral neck fracture) and keywords (undisplaced, valgus-impacted, valgus, subcapital, Garden) connected by the Boolean operators "AND" and "OR" were used to identify studies. 2 reviewers independently extracted the data using standardised forms and recording spreadsheet. Methodological validity prior to inclusion in the review using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument. Meta-analysis was undertaken. Outcome measures were rate of displacement, avascular necrosis, non-union, mortality and requirement of further operative intervention. A cost utility analysis was then conducted to compare the 2 groups on the basis of the cost of initial treatment and the potential requirement of secondary intervention to hemiarthroplasty.

Results: 47 studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis data demonstrated a significant difference in the displacement rate of 22.8% and 2.8% between the nonoperative and internal fixation groups respectively (p = 0.05). The overall incidence of further operative intervention for each group was 23% and 10% respectively. There was no significant difference with respect to avascular necrosis, mortality or union rates. The cost utility analysis revealed nonoperative management to be approximately 60% more costly than initial internal fixation when the costs of subsequent surgery were included.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis of the existing literature concludes that whilst nonoperative management is possible for valgus impacted neck of femur fractures, it is associated with higher complication rates and greater expense than management by internal fixation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
HIP International
HIP International 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: HIP International is the official journal of the European Hip Society. It is the only international, peer-reviewed, bi-monthly journal dedicated to diseases of the hip. HIP International considers contributions relating to hip surgery, traumatology of the hip, prosthetic surgery, biomechanics, and basic sciences relating to the hip. HIP International invites reviews from leading specialists with the aim of informing its readers of current evidence-based best practice. The journal also publishes supplements containing proceedings of symposia, special meetings or articles of special educational merit. HIP International is divided into six independent sections led by editors of the highest scientific merit. These sections are: • Biomaterials • Biomechanics • Conservative Hip Surgery • Paediatrics • Primary and Revision Hip Arthroplasty • Traumatology
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信