Abstract
BACKGROUND: Failed internal fixation of intertrochanteric (IT) hip fractures presents a significant challenge in the elderly, osteoporotic population. Conversion total hip arthroplasty (cTHA) and hemiarthroplasty (cHA) are both accepted salvage operations for failed IT fracture fixation, though limited clinical data exist regarding the optimal treatment between these procedures. METHODS: A systematic review of 3 databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase) was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were English-language studies that compared clinical or functional outcomes after failed fixation of IT fractures with total hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty in adult subjects (>18 years of age). Data regarding research design, surgical technique, and clinical or functional outcomes were obtained and analyzed from eligible studies using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects analysis model. RESULTS: Six studies with 188 patients (100, total hip arthroplasty; 88, hemiarthroplasty) met inclusion and exclusion criteria. There was no significant difference between cTHA and cHA for postoperative dislocation, reoperation, infection, intraoperative fractures, postoperative fractures, or stem subsidence. The mean change in Harris Hip Scores was significantly higher (P < .001) in the cTHA group (47.5 ± 4.9) than that in the cHA (38.9 ± 7.2) group at minimum 14-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Despite potential advantages of cTHA or cHA for failed IT fractures, there were no differences in complications between either of the salvage procedures. Our analysis found a slight advantage in functional outcomes (Harris Hip Score) for cTHA at a minimum 14-month follow-up. Our study suggests that cTHA and cHA are both effective salvage procedures. Additional prospective studies are warranted to further delineate outcomes after salvage arthroplasty performed for failed IT fracture fixation.