Displaced Geriatric Femoral Neck Fractures: A Retrospective Comparison of Total Hip Arthroplasties Versus Hemiarthroplasty

Steven Morgan, S. Jarvis, Alexander Conti, Kelsey Staudinger, C. Reynolds, D. Bar-Or
{"title":"Displaced Geriatric Femoral Neck Fractures: A Retrospective Comparison of Total Hip Arthroplasties Versus Hemiarthroplasty","authors":"Steven Morgan, S. Jarvis, Alexander Conti, Kelsey Staudinger, C. Reynolds, D. Bar-Or","doi":"10.1177/21514593231198949","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Controversary exists around the best surgical management for traumatic geriatric displaced femoral neck fractures. The study objective was to compare outcomes among those managed with a total hip arthroplasty (THA) to those managed with a hemiarthroplasty (HA). This retrospective matched cohort study included geriatric hip fractures (≥65 y/o) admitted 7/1/16-3/31/20. Patients were matched on having an advanced directive, pre-existing dementia, and age. Outcomes included: time to surgery, length of stay (LOS), blood loss volume, and discharge destination. THAs were compared to HAs; an alpha of <.05 indicated statistical significance. There were 191 patients: 86% were treated with HA and 14% with THA. Most (40%) were 80-89 years old, 66% were female, and 92% were white. After matching, the groups were well balanced on demographics and baseline characteristics with 27 patients/arm. The median time to surgery was 23 hours for both arms, P = .38. The LOS was significantly longer for those managed with a HA when compared to those managed with a THA, 5.6 vs 4.0 days, P = .001. The median blood loss volume was significantly lower for HAs than for THAs, but the difference was small, 100 vs 120 mL, P = .02. Patients managed with a HA were less likely to be discharged home than those managed with a THA, 22% vs 70%, P = .005. While patients managed with a THA had significantly more blood loss than those managed with a HA, the difference in blood loss was small and not clinically relevant. Those managed with a THA experienced a significantly shorter LOS and were more likely to be discharged home than patients managed with a HA. Among a healthier, younger geriatric population, THA may lead to shortened LOS and improved discharge destinations when compared to HA for treatment of femoral neck fractures.","PeriodicalId":106020,"journal":{"name":"Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery &amp; Rehabilitation","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery &amp; Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21514593231198949","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Controversary exists around the best surgical management for traumatic geriatric displaced femoral neck fractures. The study objective was to compare outcomes among those managed with a total hip arthroplasty (THA) to those managed with a hemiarthroplasty (HA). This retrospective matched cohort study included geriatric hip fractures (≥65 y/o) admitted 7/1/16-3/31/20. Patients were matched on having an advanced directive, pre-existing dementia, and age. Outcomes included: time to surgery, length of stay (LOS), blood loss volume, and discharge destination. THAs were compared to HAs; an alpha of <.05 indicated statistical significance. There were 191 patients: 86% were treated with HA and 14% with THA. Most (40%) were 80-89 years old, 66% were female, and 92% were white. After matching, the groups were well balanced on demographics and baseline characteristics with 27 patients/arm. The median time to surgery was 23 hours for both arms, P = .38. The LOS was significantly longer for those managed with a HA when compared to those managed with a THA, 5.6 vs 4.0 days, P = .001. The median blood loss volume was significantly lower for HAs than for THAs, but the difference was small, 100 vs 120 mL, P = .02. Patients managed with a HA were less likely to be discharged home than those managed with a THA, 22% vs 70%, P = .005. While patients managed with a THA had significantly more blood loss than those managed with a HA, the difference in blood loss was small and not clinically relevant. Those managed with a THA experienced a significantly shorter LOS and were more likely to be discharged home than patients managed with a HA. Among a healthier, younger geriatric population, THA may lead to shortened LOS and improved discharge destinations when compared to HA for treatment of femoral neck fractures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
移位的老年股骨颈骨折:全髋关节置换术与半髋关节置换术的回顾性比较
关于创伤性老年性股骨颈移位骨折的最佳手术治疗存在争议。研究的目的是比较全髋关节置换术(THA)和半髋关节置换术(HA)患者的结果。这项回顾性匹配队列研究纳入了2016年7月1日- 2016年3月31日收治的老年髋部骨折(≥65 y/o)患者。患者根据是否有高级指示、已存在的痴呆和年龄进行匹配。结果包括:手术时间、住院时间(LOS)、出血量和出院目的地。将THAs与HAs进行比较;<的值。0.05为有统计学意义。191例患者:86%接受HA治疗,14%接受THA治疗。大多数(40%)为80-89岁,66%为女性,92%为白人。匹配后,27例患者/组在人口统计学和基线特征上取得了很好的平衡。双臂手术的中位时间为23小时,P = 0.38。与THA组相比,HA组的LOS明显更长,分别为5.6天和4.0天,P = 0.001。ha组的中位失血量明显低于tha组,但差异很小,分别为100 mL和120 mL, P = 0.02。接受HA治疗的患者比接受THA治疗的患者更不可能出院回家,22% vs 70%, P = 0.005。虽然THA治疗的患者比HA治疗的患者有更多的出血量,但出血量的差异很小,没有临床相关性。与HA管理的患者相比,THA管理的患者的LOS明显更短,更有可能出院回家。在健康、年轻的老年人群中,与HA治疗股骨颈骨折相比,THA可缩短LOS和改善出院目的地。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Bone Health Management in Elective Orthopaedic Surgery: A Claims-Based Observational Study Displaced Geriatric Femoral Neck Fractures: A Retrospective Comparison of Total Hip Arthroplasties Versus Hemiarthroplasty
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1