Clinical effects and safety of proximal femur bionic nail versus proximal femoral nail anti-rotation or InterTAN for the treatment of intertrochanteric femoral fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis

近端股骨仿生钉与近端股骨防旋转钉或InterTAN治疗股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:4

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effects and safety of the proximal femur bionic nail (PFBN) with those of proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) and InterTAN for the treatment of intertrochanteric femoral fracture (IFF). METHODS: Studies comparing the clinical efficacy of PFBN with that of PFNA and InterTAN in the treatment of IFF published before 16 December 2025 in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, CNKI, Wanfang, and VIP databases were retrieved. After the research data were extracted, Review Manager 5.4 (RevMan 5.4 ) was used for data analysis. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies involving 990 patients were included. The meta-analysis results indicated that the PFBN group had advantages over the control group in terms of the postoperative partial and full weight-bearing time, fracture healing time, fracture reduction quality, hospital stay, postoperative Harris score, intraoperative fluoroscopy time and postoperative complication rate (partial weight-bearing time: standardized mean difference (SMD) = -3.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-4.47 to -2.52], P < 0.00001; full weight-bearing time: SMD = -1.78, 95% CI [-2.86 to -0.70], P = 0.001; fracture healing time: SMD = -0.61, 95% CI -[0.86 to -0.37], P < 0.00001; fracture reduction quality: relative risk (RR) = 1.07, 95% CI [1.01∼1.13], P = 0.02; hospital stay: SMD = -0.44, 95% CI [-0.81 to -0.08], P = 0.02; postoperative complication rate: RR = 0.36, 95% CI [0.22∼0.59], P < 0.0001; postoperative Harris score: SMD = 0.32, 95% CI [0.04∼0.60], P = 0.02; intraoperative fluoroscopy time: SMD = 0.76, 95% CI [0.10∼1.42], P = 0.02). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, operation duration, postoperative hip range of motion, postoperative VAS score, or incision length (intraoperative blood loss: SMD = -0.30, 95% CI [-0.81∼0.21], P = 0.25; operation duration: SMD = 0.41, 95% CI [-0.03∼0.85], P = 0.07; postoperative flexion and extension motion: SMD = 0.28, 95% CI [-0.18∼0.73], P = 0.23; postoperative rotational motion: SMD = 0.20, 95% CI [-0.25∼0.66], P = 0.38; incision length: SMD = 0.23, 95% CI [-0.44∼0.89], P = 0.50; postoperative VAS score: SMD = -0.29, 95% CI [-0.82∼0.23], P = 0.27). CONCLUSION: For the treatment of IFF , the PFBN is more effective and has a lower risk than the PFNA and InterTAN.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。