IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0319758.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Short versus long cephalomedullary nails for intertrochanteric femur fractures: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Author

Listed:
  • Shengquan Zhang
  • Qiaofeng Guo
  • Kai Huang
  • Haiqun Zhu

Abstract

Purpose: We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of short cephalomedullary nails(CMN) versus long CMN in patients with intertrochanteric femur fractures(IFFs). Methods: The PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases were searched for relevant publications until July 2024. All randomized controlled studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of short CMN versus long CMN in patients with IFFs were included. We estimated the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for binary outcomes, and the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes. Results: A total of 7 studies with 658 patients were included in this analysis. There was no significant difference between the short CMN group and the long CMN group in Harris hip score, mortality within 1-year, overall complication rates, or reoperation rates. However, durations of surgery were significantly lower in the short CMN group compared to the long CMN group (MD: ‒21.83 minutes, 95% CI: ‒27.54 minutes, ‒16.13 minutes), along with significantly lower intraoperative blood loss (MD: ‒136.70 mL, 95% CI: ‒139.06 mL, ‒134.34 mL) and tip-apex distance (MD: ‒0.47 cm, 95% CI: ‒0.63 cm, ‒0.31 cm). There was also no significant difference in peri-implant fracture or lengths of hospital stays. Conclusions: Short CMN are associated with shorter duration of surgery, reduced tip-apex distance, and lower intraoperative blood loss compared to long CMN for the fixation of IFFs. However, there were no significant differences in functional outcomes, overall complication rates, reoperation rates, mortality within one year, peri-implant fracture, or lengths of hospital stays.

Suggested Citation

  • Shengquan Zhang & Qiaofeng Guo & Kai Huang & Haiqun Zhu, 2025. "Short versus long cephalomedullary nails for intertrochanteric femur fractures: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 20(5), pages 1-16, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0319758
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0319758
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0319758
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0319758&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0319758?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0319758. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.