No Differences in Major In-Hospital Outcome Metrics When Comparing the Direct Lateral Approach to the Posterior Approach for Hemiarthroplasties After Traumatic Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures.
Steven Morgan, Stephanie Jarvis, Alexander Conti, Kelsey Staudinger, Cassandra Reynolds, Samantha Greenseid, David Bar-Or
{"title":"No Differences in Major In-Hospital Outcome Metrics When Comparing the Direct Lateral Approach to the Posterior Approach for Hemiarthroplasties After Traumatic Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures.","authors":"Steven Morgan, Stephanie Jarvis, Alexander Conti, Kelsey Staudinger, Cassandra Reynolds, Samantha Greenseid, David Bar-Or","doi":"10.1177/21514593241278390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The surgical approach of hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures remains debated. The study objective was to compare in-hospital outcomes for geriatric displaced femoral neck fractures treated with hemiarthroplasty based on surgical approach (direct lateral vs. posterior approach).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included geriatric patients (≥60 y/o) admitted 7/1/2016-3/31/2020 treated with hemiarthroplasty. Outcomes included: operative time (incision to closure), length of stay (HLOS), and blood loss volume (mL). The Harding direct lateral approach was compared to the posterior approach; <i>P</i> < .05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 164 patients (59% direct lateral, 41% posterior). Patients treated with the direct lateral approach had an advanced directive (<i>P</i> = .03), dementia, (<i>P</i> = .03), or were functionally dependent (<i>P</i> = .03) more often than patients treated with the posterior approach. Time to surgery was comparable between groups (<i>P</i> = .52). The direct lateral approach was associated with a shorter operative time (2.3 vs. 2.8 h, <i>P</i> = .03), a longer HLOS (5.0 vs. 4.0 days, <i>P</i> < .01), and a lower median volume of blood loss (50 vs. 100 mL, <i>P</i> = .01), than the posterior approach, respectively. In a stratified analysis, for those who <i>were not</i> functionally dependent, <i>did not have</i> dementia or an advanced directive, the direct lateral approach led to a longer HLOS (<i>P</i> = .03) and shorter operative time (<i>P</i> = .04) than the posterior approach. Whereas among those <i>who were</i> functionally dependent, <i>had</i> dementia or <i>had</i> an advanced directive, the direct lateral approach led to less blood loss (<i>P</i> = .02) than the posterior approach.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>While those treated with the direct lateral approach lost significantly less blood, they had a significantly longer HLOS than those treated with the posterior approach. Comorbidities significantly modified outcomes, which may suggest their presence could assist with treatment decisions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study found neither approach, the direct lateral nor posterior, to be superior. Surgical approach could remain physician preference.</p>","PeriodicalId":48568,"journal":{"name":"Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation","volume":"15 ","pages":"21514593241278390"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11331455/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21514593241278390","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: The surgical approach of hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures remains debated. The study objective was to compare in-hospital outcomes for geriatric displaced femoral neck fractures treated with hemiarthroplasty based on surgical approach (direct lateral vs. posterior approach).
Materials and methods: This retrospective cohort study included geriatric patients (≥60 y/o) admitted 7/1/2016-3/31/2020 treated with hemiarthroplasty. Outcomes included: operative time (incision to closure), length of stay (HLOS), and blood loss volume (mL). The Harding direct lateral approach was compared to the posterior approach; P < .05.
Results: There were 164 patients (59% direct lateral, 41% posterior). Patients treated with the direct lateral approach had an advanced directive (P = .03), dementia, (P = .03), or were functionally dependent (P = .03) more often than patients treated with the posterior approach. Time to surgery was comparable between groups (P = .52). The direct lateral approach was associated with a shorter operative time (2.3 vs. 2.8 h, P = .03), a longer HLOS (5.0 vs. 4.0 days, P < .01), and a lower median volume of blood loss (50 vs. 100 mL, P = .01), than the posterior approach, respectively. In a stratified analysis, for those who were not functionally dependent, did not have dementia or an advanced directive, the direct lateral approach led to a longer HLOS (P = .03) and shorter operative time (P = .04) than the posterior approach. Whereas among those who were functionally dependent, had dementia or had an advanced directive, the direct lateral approach led to less blood loss (P = .02) than the posterior approach.
Discussion: While those treated with the direct lateral approach lost significantly less blood, they had a significantly longer HLOS than those treated with the posterior approach. Comorbidities significantly modified outcomes, which may suggest their presence could assist with treatment decisions.
Conclusions: This study found neither approach, the direct lateral nor posterior, to be superior. Surgical approach could remain physician preference.
期刊介绍:
Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation (GOS) is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that provides clinical information concerning musculoskeletal conditions affecting the aging population. GOS focuses on care of geriatric orthopaedic patients and their subsequent rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).