Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Lillebaelt Hospital - University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Kolding, Denmark.
Injury. 2022 Nov;53(11):3805-3809. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.09.029. Epub 2022 Sep 21.
It is still debated whether to use cannulated cancellous screw (CCS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) implants for femoral neck fracture (FNF) patients but there are no studies large enough to evaluate on smaller differences. The aim were to compare the reoperation and mortality rates of a large cohort of FNF patients above 60 years of age with internal fixation using CCS and SHS implants, with stratification by fracture classification.
This register study employed prospectively collected data from 2014 to 2018 from the Danish Fracture Database, including 2-year follow-up and data on age, sex, surgery, comorbidity and fracture classification. Reoperation data was retrieved from the Danish National Patient Register. The primary outcome was major reoperation, defined as re-osteosynthesis, conversion to arthroplasty, non-union surgery, Girdlestone procedure or deep infection 1-year post-surgery. Relative risk (RR) for the CCS group compared with the SHS group was estimated using Cox proportional hazards modelling, adjusted for age, sex and comorbidity (including 95% confidence intervals).
A total of 2,598 FNFs were included, 1,731 with CCS (67%) and 867 with SHS (33%). The overall 1-year major reoperation rate was 15% with CCS and 13% with SHS, yielding an adjusted RR of 1.10 (0.88; 1.37) for CCS compared to SHS. The adjusted RR was 1.15 (0.77; 1.69) for undisplaced FNF, 1.09 (0.68; 1.75) for displaced FNF and 1.35 (0.94; 1.94) for transcervical FNF, which increased to 1.42 (1.01; 2.00) after 2 years. The minor reoperation rate was higher for CCS (3%) than SHS (1%), yielding an adjusted RR of 2.28 (1.14; 4.51). The adjusted RR for CCS compared to SHS was 0.83 (0.62; 1.12) for 30-day mortality and 0.96 (0.82; 1.14) for 1-year mortality.
We found no difference between CCS and SHS in major reoperation rates; however, for transcervical FNF, CCS was associated with higher reoperation rates. Furthermore, CCS was associated with a higher risk of minor reoperation than SHS. There were no differences in mortality rates.
对于股骨颈骨折(FNF)患者,使用空心加压螺钉(CCS)还是滑动髋螺钉(SHS)植入物仍存在争议,但没有足够大的研究来评估较小的差异。本研究旨在比较使用 CCS 和 SHS 植入物治疗年龄大于 60 岁的 FNF 患者的再手术率和死亡率,并按骨折分类分层。
本注册研究采用前瞻性收集 2014 年至 2018 年丹麦骨折数据库的数据,包括 2 年随访以及年龄、性别、手术、合并症和骨折分类的数据。再手术数据从丹麦国家患者登记处检索。主要转归是术后 1 年的主要再手术,定义为再内固定、转换为关节置换、骨不连手术、Girdlestone 手术或深部感染。使用 Cox 比例风险模型估计 CCS 组与 SHS 组的相对风险(RR),并根据年龄、性别和合并症进行调整(包括 95%置信区间)。
共纳入 2598 例 FNF,CCS 组 1731 例(67%),SHS 组 867 例(33%)。CCS 组和 SHS 组的 1 年总体主要再手术率分别为 15%和 13%,调整后的 RR 为 1.10(0.88;1.37)。未移位 FNF 的调整 RR 为 1.15(0.77;1.69),移位 FNF 为 1.09(0.68;1.75),经颈型 FNF 为 1.35(0.94;1.94),2 年后增加至 1.42(1.01;2.00)。CCS 的小手术率(3%)高于 SHS(1%),调整后的 RR 为 2.28(1.14;4.51)。CCS 组与 SHS 组的 30 天死亡率调整 RR 为 0.83(0.62;1.12),1 年死亡率调整 RR 为 0.96(0.82;1.14)。
我们没有发现 CCS 和 SHS 在主要再手术率方面的差异;然而,对于经颈型 FNF,CCS 与更高的再手术率相关。此外,CCS 与 SHS 相比,小手术的风险更高。死亡率没有差异。