Treatment options for unstable intertrochanteric fractures include intramedullary nail and extramedullary fixation, although evidence regarding the most appropriate treatment for such fractures remains controversial. Our hypothesis was that there would be no obvious differences in mortality rates, functional outcomes and complications between the two groups. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis to compare the relative advantages of intramedullary nail and extramedullary fixation. A total of 10 randomized controlled trials including only patients with unstable intertrochanteric fractures were included in the final analysis. We found that no statistically significant difference in one-year mortality was observed between the two groups (RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.55–1.10, p?=?0.160). Analysis of exact p values from five included studies indicated that functional outcomes were markedly better for patients of the intramedullary nail group when compared with those of the extramedullary fixation group (p?=?0.0028), although evidence remains controversial. Higher incidences of all complications were noted for extramedullary fixation (RR:1.48, 95% CI: 1.12–1.96, p?=?0.006). However, no significant differences in implant-related complications were observed between the two groups (RR:1.20, 95% CI: 0.73–1.97, p?=?0.475). Therefore, comparing with extramedullary fixation, the intramedullary nail method would be more reliable and should be encouraging for unstable intertrochanteric fractures.
展开▼
