Bipolar hemiarthroplasty in femoral neck fractures

Is the use of bipolar hemiarthroplasty over monopolar hemiarthroplasty justified? A propensity score-weighted analysis of a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Aims

Using data from the Hip Fracture Evaluation with Alternatives of Total Hip Arthroplasty versus Hemiarthroplasty (HEALTH) trial, we sought to determine if a difference in functional outcomes exists between monopolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasty (HA).

Methods

This study is a secondary analysis of patients aged 50 years or older with a displaced femoral neck fracture who were enrolled in the HEALTH trial and underwent monopolar and bipolar HA. Scores from the Western Ontario and McMaster University Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) and (MCS) were compared between the two HA groups using a propensity score-weighted analysis.

Results

Of 746 HAs performed in the HEALTH trial, 404 were bipolar prostheses and 342 were unipolar. After propensity score weighting, adequate balance between the bipolar and unipolar groups was obtained as shown by standardized mean differences less than 0.1 for each covariable. A total of 24 months after HA, the total WOMAC score and its subcomponents showed no statistically significant difference between the unipolar and bipolar groups. Similarly, no statistically significant difference was found in the PCS and MCS scores of the SF-12 questionnaire. In participants aged 70 years and younger, no difference was found in any of the functional outcomes.

Conclusion

From the results of this study, the use of bipolar HA over unipolar design does not provide superior functional outcomes at 24 months postoperatively. The theoretical advantage of reduced acetabular wear with bipolar designs does not appear to influence functional outcomes in the first two years postoperatively.

Total hip arthroplasty compared to bipolar and unipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced hip fractures in the elderly: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Displaced femoral neck fractures (FNF) usually require surgical treatment with either a total hip arthroplasty (THA), unipolar hemiarthroplasty (U-HHA), or bipolar hemiarthroplasty (B-HHA). However, there is still controversy regarding the optimal implant. This network meta-analysis compared the outcomes and complication rates of THA versus B-HHA and versus U-HHA in elderly patients with FNF.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study was conducted according to the PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews, and incorporated network meta-analyses of health care interventions. The literature search was performed in September 2020. All randomized clinical trials comparing two or more of the index surgical interventions for displaced FNF in the elderly were eligible for inclusion. For the Bayesian network meta-analysis, the standardized mean difference (SMD) and Log Odd Ratio (LOR) were used.

RESULTS

Data from 24 RCTs (2808 procedures) were analysed. The mean follow-up was 33.8 months. The THA group had the longest surgical time (SMD 85.74) and the greatest Harris Hip Score (SMD - 17.31). THA scored similarly in terms of mortality (LOR 3.89), but had lower rates of revision surgeries (LOR 2.24), higher rates of dislocations (LOR 2.60), and lower rates of acetabular erosion (LOR - 0.02). Cementless implants required a shorter surgical duration (- 18.05 min; P = 0.03). Mortality was positively associated with acetabular erosion (P = 0.006), female gender (P = 0.007), revision (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

THA led to the highest Harris Hip scores and lowest rate of revision surgery compared to B-HHA and U-HHA. However, B-HHA had the lowest dislocation rate when compared with U-HHA and THA. No significant differences in functional outcomes and complication rates were found between cemented and uncemented implants; however, a tendency for lower mortality, revision and dislocation rates in cemented implants was evidenced.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs.

Patients with femoral neck fractures treated by bipolar hemiarthroplasty have superior to unipolar hip function and lower erosion rates and pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

PURPOSE

We assessed acetabular erosion, hip function, quality of life (QoL), pain, deep infection, mortality, re-operation and dislocation rates in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures (dFNFs) treated with unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty at different postoperative time points.

METHODS

Relevant Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were identified, following comprehensive literature research in Medline, Cochrane Central and Scopus databases, from conception until August 31th, 2021 and analyzed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

RESULTS

Database research retrieved 120 studies; sixteen met eligibility criteria, providing 1813 (1814 hips) evaluable patients. Acetabular erosion was significantly higher for unipolar group at 6 and 12 months (p = 0.02 and p = 0.01 respectively). Patients in the bipolar group presented significantly better hip function at 12 and 24 months (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04 respectively). Postoperative pain was significantly less in the bipolar group at 12, 24 and 48 months (p = 0.01). No statistically significant differences were found regarding the postoperative rates of deep infection, mortality, re-operation and dislocation.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that patients with dFNFs treated with bipolar hemiarthroplasty have lower acetabular erosion rates at 6 and 12 months postoperatively, better hip function at 12 and 24 months, better QoL and less pain, when compared with unipolar. No statistically significant difference could be established regarding deep infection, mortality, re-operation and dislocation rates.

Should We Use Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty in Patients ≥70 Years Old With a Femoral Neck Fracture? A Review of Literature and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Bipolar (BHA) and unipolar hemiarthroplasties (UHA) are interchangeably used in elderly patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture. We ask if there is a difference between BHA and UHA with regards to hip function, in elderly patients.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of randomized controlled trials comparing BHA to UHA. The primary outcome was postoperative hip function scores. Secondary outcomes were overall health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes, acetabular erosion, and postoperative complications. Data sources, last searched on June 1, 2020, were MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science.

RESULTS

Fourteen randomized controlled trials were eligible for meta-analysis. There was no difference in hip function scores between BHA and UHA (standardized mean difference 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.06 to 0.71, n = 1084, I² = 87%). Patients with BHA with more than 2-year follow-up had better hip function scores (standardized mean difference 0.68, 95% CI 0.18-1.18, n = 700, I² = 87%). There was no difference in European Quality of life- five dimensions scores with BHA (mean difference 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.17, n = 967, I² = 82%). The use of BHA decreased the risk of acetabular erosion (relative risk 0.38, 95% CI 0.17-0.83, n = 1239, I² = 0%). There was no difference for revision, mortality, infection, and dislocation (I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

There seems to be no difference between BHA and UHA with regards to hip function at 2 years. BHA might decrease the risk of acetabular erosion. There is a need for a large randomized controlled trial with a follow-up >2 years and better measurement tools to assess clinical benefits.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Surgical interventions for treating intracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a considerable challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is rising rapidly. The majority of intracapsular hip fractures are treated surgically.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the relative effects (benefits and harms) of all surgical treatments used in the management of intracapsular hip fractures in older adults, using a network meta-analysis of randomised trials, and to generate a hierarchy of interventions according to their outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and five other databases in July 2020. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, reference lists of retrieved articles and conducted backward-citation searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing different treatments for fragility intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. We included total hip arthroplasties (THAs), hemiarthroplasties (HAs), internal fixation, and non-operative treatments. We excluded studies of people with hip fracture with specific pathologies other than osteoporosis or resulting from high-energy trauma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. One review author completed data extraction which was checked by a second review author. We collected data for three outcomes at different time points: mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) - both reported within 4 months, at 12 months, and after 24 months of surgery, and unplanned return to theatre (at end of study follow-up). We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) with Stata software, using frequentist methods, and calculated the differences between treatments using risk ratios (RRs) and standardised mean differences (SMDs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also performed direct comparisons using the same codes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 119 studies (102 RCTS, 17 quasi-RCTs) with 17,653 participants with 17,669 intracapsular fractures in the review; 83% of fractures were displaced. The mean participant age ranged from 60 to 87 years and 73% were women.  After discussion with clinical experts, we selected 12 nodes that represented the best balance between clinical plausibility and efficiency of the networks: cemented modern unipolar HA, dynamic fixed angle plate, uncemented first-generation bipolar HA, uncemented modern bipolar HA, cemented modern bipolar HA, uncemented first-generation unipolar HA, uncemented modern unipolar HA, THA with single articulation, dual-mobility THA, pins, screws, and non-operative treatment. Seventy-five studies (with 11,855 participants) with data for at least two of these treatments contributed to the NMA. We selected cemented modern unipolar HA as a reference treatment against which other treatments were compared. This was a common treatment in the networks, providing a clinically appropriate comparison. In order to provide a concise summary of the results, we report only network estimates when there was evidence of difference between treatments. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for serious and very serious risks of bias and when estimates included possible transitivity, particularly for internal fixation which included more undisplaced fractures. We also downgraded for incoherence, or inconsistency in indirect estimates, although this affected few estimates. Most estimates included the possibility of benefits and harms, and we downgraded the evidence for these treatments for imprecision.  We found that cemented modern unipolar HA, dynamic fixed angle plate and pins seemed to have the greatest likelihood of reducing mortality at 12 months. Overall, 23.5% of participants who received the reference treatment died within 12 months of surgery. Uncemented modern bipolar HA had higher mortality than the reference treatment (RR 1.37, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.85; derived only from indirect evidence; low-certainty evidence), and THA with single articulation also had higher mortality (network estimate RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.32; derived from direct evidence from 2 studies with 225 participants, and indirect evidence; very low-certainty evidence). In the remaining treatments, the certainty of the evidence ranged from low to very low, and we noted no evidence of any differences in mortality at 12 months.  We found that THA (single articulation), cemented modern bipolar HA and uncemented modern bipolar HA seemed to have the greatest likelihood of improving HRQoL at 12 months. This network was comparatively sparse compared to other outcomes and the certainty of the evidence of differences between treatments was very low. We noted no evidence of any differences in HRQoL at 12 months, although estimates were imprecise. We found that arthroplasty treatments seemed to have a greater likelihood of reducing unplanned return to theatre than internal fixation and non-operative treatment. We estimated that 4.3% of participants who received the reference treatment returned to theatre during the study follow-up. Compared to this treatment, we found low-certainty evidence that more participants returned to theatre if they were treated with a dynamic fixed angle plate (network estimate RR 4.63, 95% CI 2.94 to 7.30; from direct evidence from 1 study with 190 participants, and indirect evidence). We found very low-certainty evidence that more participants returned to theatre when treated with pins (RR 4.16, 95% CI 2.53 to 6.84; only from indirect evidence), screws (network estimate RR 5.04, 95% CI 3.25 to 7.82; from direct evidence from 2 studies with 278 participants, and indirect evidence), and non-operative treatment (RR 5.41, 95% CI 1.80 to 16.26; only from indirect evidence). There was very low-certainty evidence of a tendency for an increased risk of unplanned return to theatre for all of the arthroplasty treatments, and in particular for THA, compared with cemented modern unipolar HA, with little evidence to suggest the size of this difference varied strongly between the arthroplasty treatments.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was considerable variability in the ranking of each treatment such that there was no one outstanding, or subset of outstanding, superior treatments. However, cemented modern arthroplasties tended to more often yield better outcomes than alternative treatments and may be a more successful approach than internal fixation. There is no evidence of a difference between THA (single articulation) and cemented modern unipolar HA in the outcomes measured in this review. THA may be an appropriate treatment for a subset of people with intracapsular fracture but we have not explored this further.

Arthroplasties for hip fracture in adults

BACKGROUND

Hip fractures are a major healthcare problem, presenting a huge challenge and burden to individuals and healthcare systems. The number of hip fractures globally is rising rapidly. The majority of hip fractures are treated surgically. This review evaluates evidence for types of arthroplasty: hemiarthroplasties (HAs), which replace part of the hip joint; and total hip arthroplasties (THAs), which replace all of it.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of different designs, articulations, and fixation techniques of arthroplasties for treating hip fractures in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, seven other databases and one trials register in July 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing different arthroplasties for treating fragility intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. We included THAs and HAs inserted with or without cement, and comparisons between different articulations, sizes, and types of prostheses. We excluded studies of people with specific pathologies other than osteoporosis and with hip fractures resulting from high-energy trauma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We collected data for seven outcomes: activities of daily living, functional status, health-related quality of life, mobility (all early: within four months of surgery), early mortality and at 12 months after surgery, delirium, and unplanned return to theatre at the end of follow-up.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 58 studies (50 RCTs, 8 quasi-RCTs) with 10,654 participants with 10,662 fractures. All studies reported intracapsular fractures, except one study of extracapsular fractures. The mean age of participants in the studies ranged from 63 years to 87 years, and 71% were women. We report here the findings of three comparisons that represent the most substantial body of evidence in the review. Other comparisons were also reported, but with many fewer participants. All studies had unclear risks of bias in at least one domain and were at high risk of detection bias. We downgraded the certainty of many outcomes for imprecision, and for risks of bias where sensitivity analysis indicated that bias sometimes influenced the size or direction of the effect estimate. HA: cemented versus uncemented (17 studies, 3644 participants) There was moderate-certainty evidence of a benefit with cemented HA consistent with clinically small to large differences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.34; 3 studies, 1122 participants), and reduction in the risk of mortality at 12 months (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.96; 15 studies, 3727 participants). We found moderate-certainty evidence of little or no difference in performance of activities of daily living (ADL) (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.16; 4 studies, 1275 participants), and independent mobility (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.14; 3 studies, 980 participants). We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference in delirium (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.06; 2 studies, 800 participants), early mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.13; 12 studies, 3136 participants) or unplanned return to theatre (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; 6 studies, 2336 participants). For functional status, there was very low-certainty evidence showing no clinically important differences. The risks of most adverse events were similar. However, cemented HAs led to less periprosthetic fractures intraoperatively (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.46; 7 studies, 1669 participants) and postoperatively (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.57; 6 studies, 2819 participants), but had a higher risk of pulmonary embolus (RR 3.56, 95% CI 1.26 to 10.11, 6 studies, 2499 participants). Bipolar HA versus unipolar HA (13 studies, 1499 participants) We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between bipolar and unipolar HAs in early mortality (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.64; 4 studies, 573 participants) and 12-month mortality (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.53; 8 studies, 839 participants). We are unsure of the effect for delirium, HRQoL, and unplanned return to theatre, which all indicated little or no difference between articulation, because the certainty of the evidence was very low. No studies reported on early ADL, functional status and mobility. The overall risk of adverse events was similar. The absolute risk of dislocation was low (approximately 1.6%) and there was no evidence of any difference between treatments. THA versus HA (17 studies, 3232 participants) The difference in the risk of mortality at 12 months was consistent with clinically relevant benefits and harms (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.22; 11 studies, 2667 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in unplanned return to theatre, but this effect estimate includes clinically relevant benefits of THA (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.07, favours THA; 10 studies, 2594 participants; low-certainty evidence). We found low-certainty evidence of little or no difference between THA and HA in delirium (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; 2 studies, 357 participants), and mobility (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.96 to 0.16, favours THA; 1 study, 83 participants). We are unsure of the effect for early functional status, ADL, HRQoL, and mortality, which indicated little or no difference between interventions, because the certainty of the evidence was very low.  The overall risks of adverse events were similar. There was an increased risk of dislocation with THA (RR 1.96, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.27; 12 studies, 2719 participants) and no evidence of a difference in deep infection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For people undergoing HA for intracapsular hip fracture, it is likely that a cemented prosthesis will yield an improved global outcome, particularly in terms of HRQoL and mortality. There is no evidence to suggest a bipolar HA is superior to a unipolar prosthesis. Any benefit of THA compared with hemiarthroplasty is likely to be small and not clinically appreciable. We encourage researchers to focus on alternative implants in current clinical practice, such as dual-mobility bearings, for which there is limited available evidence.

Long-term outcome of patients with primary or secondary tumors of the proximal femur treated by bipolar modular tumor prosthesis

PURPOSE

The proximal femur is a common area for primary and also metastatic bone tumors. The objective of this study was to assess the long-term functional and oncological outcomes of patients with malignant primary or secondary tumors of the proximal femur, who underwent proximal femoral resection then reconstruction using bipolar modular tumor prosthesis.

METHODS

Sixty patients with proximal femoral malignant tumors underwent resection and bipolar modular prosthesis between 2000 and 2016, were retrospectively reviewed. Based on diagnosis and presence or absence of pathological fracture, patients were divided into groups. The functional outcome of the patients was evaluated using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) functional scoring system for the lower extremities.

RESULTS

The mean age was 38 (9-80) years at the time of primary surgery. Pathological fracture was the presentation in 28 patients. The study included 44 patients with primary bone tumor and 16 patients with a secondary bone tumor. The mean MSTS functional score of the patients was 24.3 (range, 18-30) points with no significant difference in patients with primary or secondary tumors. The rate of complications in the present series was 45%. The most frequent complication was an infection in 10 patients (16.7%), followed by aseptic loosening in 7 patients (11.7%). Local recurrence of primary bone tumors occurred in three out of 44 patients (6.8%).

CONCLUSION

Modular bipolar tumor prosthesis has a good long-term functional result in both primary and secondary tumors of the proximal femur, with no significant effect of age, presence or absence of pathological fracture or femoral resection length on the functional outcome. It was found that the only statistically significant variable regarding the risk of infection is previous surgeries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

Unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures: A pooled analysis of 30,250 participants data

PURPOSE

To assess the clinical outcomes of unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures in older patients and to report whether bipolar implants yield better long-term functional results.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library for relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies, comparing unipolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Data were extracted from eligible studies and pooled as relative risk (RR) or mean difference (MD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) using RevMan software for Windows.

RESULTS

A total of 30 studies were included (13 RCTs and 17 observational studies). Analyses included 30,250 patients with a mean age of 79 years and mean follow-up time of 24.6 months. The overall pooled estimates showed that bipolar was superior to unipolar hemiarthroplasty in terms of hip function, range of motion and reoperation rate, but at the expense of longer operative time. In the longer term the unipolar group had higher rates of acetabular erosion compared to the bipolar group. There was no significant difference in terms of hip pain, implant related complications, intraoperative blood loss, mortality, six-minute walk times, medical outcomes, and hospital stay and subsequently cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Bipolar hemiarthroplasty is associated with better range of motion, lower rates of acetabular erosion and lower reoperation rates compared to the unipolar hemiarthroplasty but at the expense of longer operative time. Both were similar in terms of mortality, and surgical or medical outcomes. Future large studies are recommended to compare both methods regarding the quality of life.

Impact of Renal Function on the Surgical Outcomes of Displaced Femoral Neck Fracture in Elderly Patients

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and outcomes of bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture in elderly patients, and to compare postoperative complications and mortality among groups according to eGFR. Methods: A total of 181 patients who underwent bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture were divided into three groups according to eGFR. Data were retrospectively analyzed. Group 1 had 96 patients with eGFR greater than or equal to 60 mL/min/1.73 m²; Group 2 had 54 patients with eGFR greater than or equal to 30 mL/min/1.73 m² and lower than 60 mL/min/1.73 m²; and Group 3 had 31 patients with eGFR lower than 30 mL/min/1.73 m². Postoperative complications and mortality were compared between groups at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Results: Patients in Group 3 had the longest hospital stay of the three groups (p = 0.001). The rates of medical complications did not differ significantly among groups. However, Group 2 and 3 had higher rates of surgical complications (p = 0.001) and mortality (p = 0.043) than Group 1. Severe renal impairment was associated with increased risk of postoperative complications compared to mild renal impairment (odds ratio (95% confidence interval) = 4.33 (1.32–13.19), p = 0.015). Conclusion: Patients with moderate or severe decreased eGFR associated with chronic kidney disease (CKD) could have higher postoperative complications and mortality after bipolar hemiarthroplasty compared to patients with CKD stage 1 or 2.

Interventions for treating displaced intracapsular femoral neck fractures in the elderly: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Displaced intracapsular femoral neck (AO type 31 B2/3) fractures have various treatments, including internal fixation (IF), unipolar uncemented hemiarthroplasty (HA), bipolar uncemented HA, unipolar cemented HA, bipolar cemented HA, uncemented total hip replacement (THR), and cemented THR. Systematic literature retrieval was performed from the databases to compare them in a network meta-analysis. Forty studies (85 arms) containing 6141 patients were included. Overall, our network meta-analysis rank the orders of 7 procedures in reoperation, mortality, dislocation and infection, which indicates that IF may provide the highest reoperation incidence, unipolar cemented HA may provide the lowest reoperation incidence; uncemented THR contributes the highest dislocation incidence; and bipolar uncemented HA provides the lowest infection incidence. No differences in mortality were observed among the treatments. This conclusion is indirect; higher-quality direct comparisons are required.

The Cemented Unipolar Prosthesis for the Management of Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures in the Dependent Osteopenic Elderly

BACKGROUND

Significant variability exists across orthopedic surgeons in the management of the displaced femoral neck fracture in the elderly patient (>75 years old). These patients tend to be less healthy, have inferior bone quality, and gait instability leading to increased risk of periprosthetic fracture, compromised implant fixation, dislocation, and need for revision. The surgeon's goals should be to restore mobility while eliminating pain and need for reoperation.

METHODS

In this review article, we examine the best available evidence in the literature to determine which strategy achieves optimal outcomes. We examine outcome studies comparing use of hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty, unipolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasty, and cemented vs cementless fixation of femoral stems.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

For the active, healthy, and lucid patient, or one who has preexisting groin pain, who sustains a displaced femoral neck fracture, the literature supports a total hip arthroplasty. Patients sustaining a displaced femoral neck fracture and who are less active, have decreased bone mass, and are at increased risk of falls would benefit most from a device that optimally balances the need for revision surgery, restores ambulation, and eliminates pain. Thus, the current evidence favors cemented, unipolar hemiarthroplasty for the dependent osteopenic elderly patient with a displaced femoral neck fracture.

Unipolar Versus Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures in Elderly Patients

Hip replacement using hemiarthroplasty (HA) is a common surgical procedure in elderly patients with femoral neck fractures. However, questions remain regarding the choice of unipolar or bipolar HA. A meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to determine whether bipolar HA was associated with lower rates of dislocation, reoperation, acetabular erosion, mortality, and general complications, as well as lower Harris Hip Scores, compared with unipolar HA. The authors searched PubMed and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials database, and 8 RCTs (including a total of 1100 patients) were selected for meta-analysis. Risk ratios (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) from each trial were pooled using random-effects or fixed-effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies. There were no differences in dislocation (RR=1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47 to 3.07), reoperation (RR=0.64; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.26), acetabular erosion (RR=2.29; 95% CI, 0.85 to 6.12), mortality (RR=0.85; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.13), and general complications (RR=1.05; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.56). The authors found no difference in postoperative Harris Hip Scores between patients undergoing unipolar vs bipolar HA (WMD=-1.32; 95% CI, -3.29 to 0.65; P=.19). Unipolar and bipolar HA achieved similar clinical outcomes in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures.

Early Results of a Geriatric Hip Fracture Program in India for Femoral Neck Fracture

Geriatric hip fractures are a challenging clinical problem throughout the world. Hip fracture services have been shown to shorten time to surgery, decrease the cost of admissions, and improve the outcomes. We instituted a geriatric hip fracture program for comanagement of these injuries by orthopedic and internal medicine teams at our hospital in India. From January 2010 till December 2011, 119 patients with a femoral neck fracture were treated with cemented modular hemiarthroplasty under this program using a cost-effective Indian implant. The cohort included 63 males and 56 females with a mean age of 70.7 years (range 55-98 years). Hypertension (n = 42) and diabetes mellitus (n = 29) were the most common comorbidities. The follow-up period ranged from 12 to 37 months with an average of 24 months. The surgery was performed within 24 hours of admission in 60.5% (n = 72) patients. The use of antiplatelet drugs was the most common reason for delay of surgery. The mean length of hospital stay was 10.4 days (range 3-24 days) with 77% (n = 92) of patients discharged within 1 week of admission. On follow-up, good to excellent Harris hip scores were seen in 88% of patients with 76% of patients returning to the preinjury ambulatory status. The mortality rate was 6% at 6 months follow-up and 10.9% at 2 years. Our study shows that a hip fracture program can be instituted in India. The program helped us in achieving the goal of early surgery, mobilization, and discharge from hospital with decreased mortality.

Unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Whether bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BH) for displaced femoral neck fractures has benefit over unipolar hemiarthroplasty (UH) remains controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the relative effects between BH and UH.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (up to April, 2014) was conducted to include RCTs comparing BH with UH for displaced femoral neck fractures. Two authors independently assessed methodological quality of the included studies and extracted data. Surgical information and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 10 RCTs including 1,190 patients were indentified. Our results demonstrated that BH was associated with similar or better outcomes in hip function, hip pain, and quality of life while with a higher cost compared with UH. Moreover, there were no significant differences between BH and UH with regard to operation time, blood loss, blood transfusion, hospital stay, mortality, reoperation, dislocation, and complications. BH could significantly decrease the incidence of acetabular erosion at 1 year follow-up compared with UH (RR = 0.24, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.06 to 0.89, P = 0.03), but no significant difference was observed at 4 months, 2 years, and 4 years follow-ups.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, BH is not superior to UH in terms of surgical information and postoperative results. Despite similar or better clinical outcomes compared with UH, BH with a higher cost could not decrease long-term acetabular erosion rate.

Unipolar hemiarthroplasty versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures: a four-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial

PURPOSE

The treatment of choice for a displaced femoral neck fracture in the most elderly patients is a cemented hemiarthroplasty (HA). The optimal design, unipolar or bipolar head, remains unclear. The possible advantages of a bipolar HA are a better range of motion and less acetabular wear. The aim of this study was to evaluate hip function, health related quality of life (HRQoL), surgical outcome and acetabular erosion in a medium-term follow-up.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty patients aged 80 or more with a displaced fracture of the femoral neck (Garden III and IV) were randomised to treatment with a cemented Exeter HA using a unipolar or a bipolar head. All patients were able to walk independently, with or without aids, before surgery. Follow-ups were performed at four, 12, 24 and 48 months postoperatively. Assessments included HRQoL (EQ-5D index score), hip function (Harris hip score [HHS]) and radiological acetabular erosion.

RESULTS

The mean EQ-5D index score was generally higher among the patients with bipolar hemiarthroplasties at the follow-ups with a significant difference at 48 months: unipolar HAs 0.59 and bipolar HAs 0.70 (p = 0.04). There was an increased rate of acetabular erosion among the patients with unipolar hemiarthroplasties at the early follow-ups with a significant difference at 12 months (unipolar HAs 20% and bipolar HAs 5%, p = 0.03). At the later follow-ups the incidence of acetabular erosion accelerated in the bipolar group, and there were no significant differences between the groups at the 24- and 48-month follow-ups. There was no difference in HHS or reoperation rate between the groups at any of the follow-ups.

CONCLUSION

The bipolar HAs seem to result in better HRQoL beyond the first two years after surgery compared to unipolar HAs. Bipolar HAs displayed a later onset of acetabular erosion compared to unipolar HAs.

Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing unipolar with bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral-neck fractures

PURPOSE

Unipolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasty (HA) are used to treat displaced femoral-neck fractures. However, which type is best for treating displaced femoral-neck fractures in elderly patients remains a subject for debate. Our aim was to review randomised controlled trials to establish which type provides superior clinical outcome for this patient population.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases and Web of Science for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing unipolar with bipolar HA to treat femoral-neck fracture in the elderly. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) from each trial were pooled using random-effects or fixed-effects models depending on study heterogeneity. Analysis was performed using RevMan5.2 from the Cochrane Collaboration.

RESULTS

A total of 1,100 patients from nine studies were assessed in this meta-analysis. Results showed no significant differences in function score [MD = -0.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.42-2.13], mortality (RR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.65-1.46), dislocation (RR = 1.33, 95% CI 0.53-3.34), deep infection (RR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.35-1.79), acetabular erosion (RR = 1.99, 95% CI 0.61-6.52), operating time (MD = 2.14, 95% CI -9.85 to14.14), blood loss (MD = 13.40, 95% CI -49.60 to 76.39) and length of hospital stay (MD = 0.12, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.73) between unipolar and bipolar HA.

CONCLUSIONS

Unipolar and bipolar HA achieved similar clinical outcomes in patients with displaced femoral-neck fractures.

Comparative pooled survival and revision rate of Austin-Moore hip arthroplasty in published literature and arthroplasty register data

The aim was to evaluate the pooled survival and revision rate of Austin-Moore hip arthroplasty (AMHA) in published literature and arthroplasty register data. A comprehensive literature analysis of clinical publications and register reports was conducted with the main endpoints revision surgery and revision rate. Sixteen relevant clinical studies have been found to significantly underestimate revision rates by a ratio of 2.15 compared to register data sets. The medium-term outcome of AMHA showed significantly worse outcomes than the use of other bipolar implants, or modular cervicocephalic prostheses and data of journal publications on revision rates deviate significantly from data of arthroplasty registers.

Survival of patients aged over 80 years after Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty and bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures

OBJECTIVES

Hemiarthroplasty is recommended for treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in physically compromised elderly patients. The objective of this study was to analyze survival of patients aged >80 years after the implantation of either an Austin-Moore type prosthesis or a bipolar bearing prosthesis.

METHODS

An Austin-Moore or bipolar hemiarthroplasty was implanted into 120 patients aged >80 years. Demographic data were collected. Survival rate at 5 years and factors related to mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients received Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty, and 58 received bipolar hemiarthroplasty. No significant differences in gender, comorbid conditions, ASA scores, duration of hospitalization, intraoperative blood loss, duration from injury to operation, or postoperative morbidity between the two groups were found. However, patients who received the Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty were older and had shorter operation time than those who received bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5 years survival were 40.0% for patients who received Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty, and 62.9% for patients who received bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis of risks factors of death revealed that patients who underwent Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty were 2.0-fold more likely to die when compared to those who received bipolar hemiarthroplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients who receive bipolar hemiarthroplasty may have a more favorable survival outcome when compared to those who receive unipolar hemiarthroplasty.

Radiostereometric analysis of hemiarthroplasties of the hip--a highly precise method for measurements of cartilage wear

OBJECTIVE

Cartilage wear is a feature of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Precise measurements of wear have been difficult. Cartilage wear caused by an artificial articulating joint surface is a well-known feature of hemiarthroplasties. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that radiostereometric analysis (RSA) may be used for three-dimensional measurements of cartilage wear in hemiarthroplasties of the hip.

METHOD

We performed a phantom model study to assess the feasibility of a subsequent clinical trial. We showed that the motion of the prosthetic head relative to the pelvis was not influenced by the orientation of the prosthetic head. Twenty-two patients were randomised to treatment with a cemented or an uncemented hemiarthroplasty for an acute femoral neck fracture. Migration of the prosthetic head into the acetabulum was measured using RSA.

RESULTS

A mean migration of the prosthetic head into the acetabulum of 0.62 mm was found at 3 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.97] and a further migration of -0.07 mm at 12 months (95% CI: -0.16-0.32). There were no differences between the groups in prosthetic migration or functional outcome. Between three and 12 months, there was no detectable cartilage wear during the first postoperative year.

CONCLUSION

Whether the migration during the first 3 months represents a period of bedding in due to a harder opposite surface remains to be shown. RSA may be used for measurement of cartilage wear in hemiarthroplasties of the hip. This study demonstrates a highly precise method for measurements of cartilage wear.

Arthroplasties (with and without bone cement) for proximal femoral fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

Numerous types of arthroplasties may be used in the surgical treatment of a hip fracture (proximal femoral fracture). The main differences between the implants are in the design of the stems, whether the stem is cemented or uncemented, whether a second articulating joint is included within the prosthesis (bipolar prosthesis), or whether a partial (hemiarthroplasty) or total whole hip replacement is used.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomised controlled trials comparing different arthroplasties for the treatment of hip fractures in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (September 2009), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 3), MEDLINE, EMBASE and trial registers (all to September 2009), and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different arthroplasties and their insertion with or without cement, for the treatment of hip fractures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality, by use of a 10-item checklist, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three trials involving 2861 older and mainly female patients with proximal femoral fractures are included. Cemented prostheses, when compared with uncemented prostheses (6 trials, 899 participants) were associated with a less pain at a year or later and improved mobility. No significant difference in surgical complications was found. One trial of 220 participants compared a hydroxyapatite coated hemiarthroplasty with a cemented prosthesis and reported no notable differences between the two prosthesis. Comparison of unipolar hemiarthroplasty with bipolar hemiarthroplasty (7 trials, 857 participants, 863 fractures) showed no significant differences between the two types of implant. Seven trials involving 734 participants compared hemiarthroplasty with a total hip replacement (THR). Most studies involved cemented implants. Dislocation of the prosthesis was more common with the THR but there was a general trend within these studies to better functional outcome scores for those treated with the THR.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is good evidence that cementing the prostheses in place will reduce post-operative pain and lead to better mobility. From the trials to date there is no evidence of any difference in outcome between bipolar and unipolar prosthesis. There is some evidence that a total hip replacement leads to better functional outcome than a hemiarthroplasty. Further well-conducted randomised trials are required.

Bipolar proximal femoral replacement prostheses for musculoskeletal neoplasms

While bipolar proximal femoral replacement prostheses (PFRP) have become a common treatment for tumors of the proximal femur, long-term results are not specified in the literature. The objective was to determine the complication and revision rates of bipolar PFRP and compare them to historical controls of bipolar hemiarthroplasties for nontumor indications. Information was retrospectively collected on 62 patients who received bipolar PFRP with cemented diaphyseal stems for primary or metastatic disease of the proximal femur from 1981 to 2003. Mean followup was 5 years. Twelve of 62 (19%) bipolar PFRPs underwent revision. Aseptic loosening was the most common complication with six (10%) undergoing revision. None were converted to THA due to acetabular erosion. Three patients (5%) had problems with dislocation and three (5%) had deep infections. Mean MSTS functional rating was 71% of normal function. The limb salvage rate was 98% and the 5-year event-free prosthetic survival was 79%. Bipolar PFRPs were found to have higher revision, dislocation, and deep infection rates compared to bipolar hemiarthroplasty for nontumor indications, but a lower rate of conversion to THA due to acetabular erosion. Bipolar PFRPs have good long-term durability with some complications, but are able to preserve the limb and provide good function for patients.

Arthroplasties (with and without bone cement) for proximal femoral fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

Numerous types of arthroplasties may be used in the surgical treatment of a hip fracture (proximal femoral fracture). The main differences between the implants are in the design of the stems, whether the stem is fixed in place with or without cement, whether a second articulating joint is included within the prosthesis (bipolar prosthesis) or whether a partial (hemiarthroplasty) or total whole hip replacement is used.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomised controlled trials that have compared different arthroplasties for the treatment of hip fractures in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (December 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the UK National Research Register, several orthopaedic journals, conference proceedings and reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different arthroplasties and their insertion with or without cement, for the treatment of hip fractures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality, by use of a ten-item checklist, and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen trials involving 1920 patients were included. One trial involved two comparisons. Cemented prostheses, when compared with uncemented (six trials, 549 participants) were associated with less pain at a year or later (16/52 versus 28/52; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.81) and a tendency to better mobility. No significant difference in surgical complications was found. Comparison of unipolar hemiarthroplasty with bipolar hemiarthroplasty (seven trials, 857 participants, 863 fractures) showed no significant differences between the two types of implant. Two trials involving 232 patients compared uncemented hemiarthroplasty with a total hip replacement. Both studies reported increased pain for the uncemented prosthesis and one study found better mobility and a lower long-term revision rate for those treated with a THR. Two trials involving 214 participants compared cemented hemiarthroplasty versus total hip replacement. Both trials generally found little difference between prostheses. THR was associated with a slightly longer surgical time but a tendency to better functional outcome in one trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is limited evidence that cementing a prosthesis in place may reduce post-operative pain and lead to better mobility. There is insufficient evidence to determine the roles of bipolar prostheses and total hip replacement. Further well-conducted randomised trials are required.

Displaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly: hemiarthroplasty versus total hip arthroplasty

The incidence of femoral neck fracture among the elderly in the United States is expected to increase dramatically because of the anticipated explosion in the population aged 65 years and older, increased life expectancy, and the rising incidence of osteoporosis. The resulting public health implications may be significant, with annual hospital admissions resulting from hip fracture projected to increase to 700,000 by 2050, and with annual spending on hip fracture care expected to exceed 15 billion dollars within a few years. The decision to perform internal fixation, unipolar hemiarthroplasty, bipolar hemiarthroplasty, or THA must be based on patient mental status, living arrangement, level of independence and activity, and bone and joint quality.

Dislocation of bipolar hemiarthroplasty: rate, contributing factors, and outcome

Dislocation of bipolar hemiarthroplasty of the hip is a rare complication. The objectives of our study were to assess the incidence, contributing factors, and outcomes of bipolar prosthesis dislocation. From 1974 to 2001, 1812 primary bipolar hemiarthroplasties were done at our institution. Seventy-four percent were done in patients with fractures of the femoral neck. An anterolateral surgical approach was used in 79% of hips, a posterolateral approach was used in 14% of hips, and a transtrochanteric approach was used in 7% of hips. Thirty-two hips dislocated. The cumulative probabilities of dislocation at 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, and 20 years were 1.1% (95% CI range, 0.6%-1.6%), 1.5% (95% CI range, 0.9%-2.1%), 2.1% (95% CI range, 1.2%-3.1%), and 5% (95% CI range, 1.9%-9.6%), respectively. There was no significant association of dislocation with the surgical approach or with the primary operative diagnosis. More than (1/2) of the dislocations occurred within 6 months postoperative. Late dislocations occurred most commonly in patients with Bateman prostheses and osteonecrosis and were associated with inner bearing dissociation. Closed reduction was successful in preventing additional surgery in only 30% of patients. The surgeon must be aware that closed reduction may be unsuccessful, and open reduction with replacement of components may be necessary.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study, Level IV (case series). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Stability of hip hemiarthroplasties

It has been stated in the literature that a bipolar hemiarthroplasty has a lower risk of dislocation compared to a unipolar hemiarthroplasty. As this statement has not been substantiated we undertook a systematic review of the literature of published articles from the last 40 years. In addition we used our own database of hip fractures. One hundred and thirty-three published articles were included in the review to give a total of 23,107 cases. The overall dislocation rate for all types of hemiarthroplasty was 791/23,107 (3.4%). An increased risk of dislocation was associated with a posterior surgical approach and the use of a cemented prosthesis. After adjustment for surgical approach and the use of cement there was no difference in risk of dislocation between unipolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasties. There was an increased risk of open reduction for a bipolar hemiarthroplasty.

Arthroplasties (with and without bone cement) for proximal femoral fractures in adults

BACKGROUND

Numerous types of arthroplasties may be used in the surgical treatment of a hip fracture (proximal femoral fracture). The main differences between the implants are the design of the stems, whether the stem is fixed in place with or without cement, whether a second articulating joint is included within the prosthesis (bipolar prosthesis) or whether the whole hip joint is replaced.

OBJECTIVES

To review all randomised trials that have compared different arthroplasties for the treatment of hip fractures in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register which is compiled by regular searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. Additional trials were identified by searching reference lists of relevant articles, conference proceedings, and contact with trialists. Date of most recent search: October 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing different arthroplasties (and/or cement), for the treatment of hip fractures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality, by use of a ten-item checklist and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials involving 1670 patients were included. One trial involved two comparisons. Cemented prostheses, when compared with uncemented (five trials, 482 participants) were associated with a lower risk of failure to regain mobility (relative risk (RR) 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.82) and of post-operation pain at a year or later (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.81). For this comparison, there were no significant differences in any other outcome. Comparison of unipolar hemiarthroplasty with bipolar hemiarthroplasty (seven trials, 857 participants) showed no significant differences between the two types of implant. Two trials of 269 patients compared different types of hemiarthroplasty with a total hip replacement and two trials of 151 patients compared either different types of prosthesis head or different bipolar prostheses. Because of the limited number of cases and the use of different prostheses, no definite conclusions could be made from these four studies.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Cementing prostheses in place seems to reduce pain post-operatively and results in better mobility, but because of the under-reporting of outcomes and the small number of patients involved, no definite conclusions can be made. The role of bipolar prostheses and total hip replacement is uncertain. Further well-conducted randomised trials are required.

Long-term survivorship of cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty for fracture of the femoral neck

Cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty commonly is used to treat displaced fractures of the femoral neck in elderly patients. The purpose of the current study was to review the results and survivorship of 212 bipolar hemiarthroplasties done in 205 patients for acute femoral neck fracture between 1976 and 1985. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 79 years (range, 61-100 years). The mean followup for the patients who were alive was 11.7 years (range, 5.3-16.8 years) and 5.8 years (range, 51 days-19.4 years) for the entire group. Ten hips (4.7%) were revised or removed: five for aseptic femoral component loosening, one for acetabular erosion, one for chronic dislocation, and three for infection. In living patients with surviving implants, 96.2% had no or slight pain. Ten-year survivorship free of reoperation for any reason was 93.6%, free of revision surgery for aseptic femoral loosening or acetabular cartilage wear was 95.9%, free of revision surgery for aseptic femoral loosening was 96.5%, and free of revision surgery for acetabular cartilage wear was 99.4%. Cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is associated with excellent component survivorship in elderly patients. The rate of complications was low, and the arthroplasty provided satisfactory pain relief for the lifetime of the majority of elderly patients.