Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Internal fixation implants for intracapsular hip fractures in adults

  1. Martyn J Parker1,*,
  2. Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy2

Editorial Group: Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group

Published Online: 23 OCT 2001

Assessed as up-to-date: 5 NOV 2010

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001467


How to Cite

Parker MJ, Gurusamy KS. Internal fixation implants for intracapsular hip fractures in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2001, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD001467. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001467.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Department of Orthopaedics, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, UK

  2. 2

    Royal Free Campus, UCL Medical School, Department of Surgery, London, UK

*Martyn J Parker, Department of Orthopaedics, Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Peterborough City Hospital, CBU PO Box 211, Bretton Gate, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, PE3 9GZ, UK. martyn.parker@pbh-tr.nhs.uk.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New search for studies and content updated (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 23 OCT 2001

SEARCH

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
[Figure 2]
Figure 2. Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Thornton nail versus three Scand pins, Outcome 1 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Thornton nail versus three Scand pins, Outcome 2 Re-operations.
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Thornton nail versus sliding nail plate, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 2.2]
Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Thornton nail versus sliding nail plate, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 2.3]
Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Thornton nail versus sliding nail plate, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 3.1]
Analysis 3.1. Comparison 3 Sliding compression screw plate versus fixed nail plate, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 3.2]
Analysis 3.2. Comparison 3 Sliding compression screw plate versus fixed nail plate, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 3.3]
Analysis 3.3. Comparison 3 Sliding compression screw plate versus fixed nail plate, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 3.4]
Analysis 3.4. Comparison 3 Sliding compression screw plate versus fixed nail plate, Outcome 4 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 3.5]
Analysis 3.5. Comparison 3 Sliding compression screw plate versus fixed nail plate, Outcome 5 Superficial wound infection.
[Analysis 3.6]
Analysis 3.6. Comparison 3 Sliding compression screw plate versus fixed nail plate, Outcome 6 Deep wound infection.
[Analysis 3.7]
Analysis 3.7. Comparison 3 Sliding compression screw plate versus fixed nail plate, Outcome 7 Mortality - 1 year.
[Analysis 4.1]
Analysis 4.1. Comparison 4 Sliding hip screw versus sliding nail plate, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 4.2]
Analysis 4.2. Comparison 4 Sliding hip screw versus sliding nail plate, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 4.3]
Analysis 4.3. Comparison 4 Sliding hip screw versus sliding nail plate, Outcome 3 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 4.4]
Analysis 4.4. Comparison 4 Sliding hip screw versus sliding nail plate, Outcome 4 Pain at follow-up.
[Analysis 5.1]
Analysis 5.1. Comparison 5 Sliding hip screw versus double divergent pins, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 5.2]
Analysis 5.2. Comparison 5 Sliding hip screw versus double divergent pins, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 5.3]
Analysis 5.3. Comparison 5 Sliding hip screw versus double divergent pins, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 5.4]
Analysis 5.4. Comparison 5 Sliding hip screw versus double divergent pins, Outcome 4 Re-operations.
[Analysis 5.5]
Analysis 5.5. Comparison 5 Sliding hip screw versus double divergent pins, Outcome 5 Use of walking aids at follow-up.
[Analysis 6.1]
Analysis 6.1. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 6.2]
Analysis 6.2. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 6.3]
Analysis 6.3. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 6.4]
Analysis 6.4. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 6.5]
Analysis 6.5. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 5 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 6.6]
Analysis 6.6. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 6 Deep wound infection.
[Analysis 6.7]
Analysis 6.7. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 7 Mortality.
[Analysis 6.8]
Analysis 6.8. Comparison 6 Sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws, Outcome 8 Pain at follow-up.
[Analysis 7.1]
Analysis 7.1. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 7.2]
Analysis 7.2. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 7.3]
Analysis 7.3. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 7.4]
Analysis 7.4. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 7.5]
Analysis 7.5. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 5 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 7.6]
Analysis 7.6. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 6 Superficial wound infection.
[Analysis 7.7]
Analysis 7.7. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 7 Deep wound infection.
[Analysis 7.8]
Analysis 7.8. Comparison 7 von Bahr screws versus Hessel pins, Outcome 8 Mortality - 2 years.
[Analysis 8.1]
Analysis 8.1. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 8.2]
Analysis 8.2. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 8.3]
Analysis 8.3. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 8.4]
Analysis 8.4. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 8.5]
Analysis 8.5. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 5 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 8.6]
Analysis 8.6. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 6 Superficial wound infection.
[Analysis 8.7]
Analysis 8.7. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 7 Deep wound infection.
[Analysis 8.8]
Analysis 8.8. Comparison 8 von Bahr screws versus Gouffon screws, Outcome 8 Mortality - 2 years.
[Analysis 9.1]
Analysis 9.1. Comparison 9 Two von Bahr screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 9.2]
Analysis 9.2. Comparison 9 Two von Bahr screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 9.3]
Analysis 9.3. Comparison 9 Two von Bahr screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 9.4]
Analysis 9.4. Comparison 9 Two von Bahr screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 9.5]
Analysis 9.5. Comparison 9 Two von Bahr screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 5 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 9.6]
Analysis 9.6. Comparison 9 Two von Bahr screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 6 Mortality - 12 months.
[Analysis 10.1]
Analysis 10.1. Comparison 10 Three Richards screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 10.2]
Analysis 10.2. Comparison 10 Three Richards screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 10.3]
Analysis 10.3. Comparison 10 Three Richards screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 10.4]
Analysis 10.4. Comparison 10 Three Richards screws versus two Uppsala screws, Outcome 4 Pain (moderate/severe) at one year.
[Analysis 11.1]
Analysis 11.1. Comparison 11 Three Ullevaal screws versus two Uppsala/Olmed screws, Outcome 1 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 11.2]
Analysis 11.2. Comparison 11 Three Ullevaal screws versus two Uppsala/Olmed screws, Outcome 2 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 11.3]
Analysis 11.3. Comparison 11 Three Ullevaal screws versus two Uppsala/Olmed screws, Outcome 3 Fracture below screws (requiring re-operation).
[Analysis 12.1]
Analysis 12.1. Comparison 12 Three Ullevaal screws versus two Tronzo screws, Outcome 1 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 12.2]
Analysis 12.2. Comparison 12 Three Ullevaal screws versus two Tronzo screws, Outcome 2 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 12.3]
Analysis 12.3. Comparison 12 Three Ullevaal screws versus two Tronzo screws, Outcome 3 Fracture below screws (requiring re-operation).
[Analysis 13.1]
Analysis 13.1. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 13.2]
Analysis 13.2. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 13.3]
Analysis 13.3. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 13.4]
Analysis 13.4. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 13.5]
Analysis 13.5. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 5 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 13.6]
Analysis 13.6. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 6 Fracture below screws (requiring re-operation).
[Analysis 13.7]
Analysis 13.7. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 7 Re-operation for arthroplasty or non-union.
[Analysis 13.8]
Analysis 13.8. Comparison 13 Three screws (any type) versus two screws (any type), Outcome 8 Pain (moderate/severe) at one year.
[Analysis 14.1]
Analysis 14.1. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 14.2]
Analysis 14.2. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 14.3]
Analysis 14.3. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 3 Fracture below screws.
[Analysis 14.4]
Analysis 14.4. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 4 Re-operations - all types.
[Analysis 14.5]
Analysis 14.5. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 5 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 14.6]
Analysis 14.6. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 6 Mortality - one year.
[Analysis 14.7]
Analysis 14.7. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 7 Pain at one year follow-up.
[Analysis 14.8]
Analysis 14.8. Comparison 14 Three short thread AO screws versus three long threaded AO screws, Outcome 8 Failure to return to same residential status at one year (survivors).
[Analysis 15.1]
Analysis 15.1. Comparison 15 Three Scand screws versus three Nystrom nails, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 15.2]
Analysis 15.2. Comparison 15 Three Scand screws versus three Nystrom nails, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 15.3]
Analysis 15.3. Comparison 15 Three Scand screws versus three Nystrom nails, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 15.4]
Analysis 15.4. Comparison 15 Three Scand screws versus three Nystrom nails, Outcome 4 Superficial wound infection.
[Analysis 15.5]
Analysis 15.5. Comparison 15 Three Scand screws versus three Nystrom nails, Outcome 5 Deep wound infection.
[Analysis 15.6]
Analysis 15.6. Comparison 15 Three Scand screws versus three Nystrom nails, Outcome 6 Mortality - one year.
[Analysis 15.7]
Analysis 15.7. Comparison 15 Three Scand screws versus three Nystrom nails, Outcome 7 Mortality - two years.
[Analysis 16.1]
Analysis 16.1. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 16.2]
Analysis 16.2. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 16.3]
Analysis 16.3. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 16.4]
Analysis 16.4. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 4 Re-operations.
[Analysis 16.5]
Analysis 16.5. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 5 Superficial wound infection.
[Analysis 16.6]
Analysis 16.6. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 6 Deep wound infection.
[Analysis 16.7]
Analysis 16.7. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 7 Mortality - one year.
[Analysis 16.8]
Analysis 16.8. Comparison 16 Three Gouffon screws versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 8 Mortality - two years.
[Analysis 17.1]
Analysis 17.1. Comparison 17 Two Hansson pins versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 17.2]
Analysis 17.2. Comparison 17 Two Hansson pins versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 17.3]
Analysis 17.3. Comparison 17 Two Hansson pins versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 17.4]
Analysis 17.4. Comparison 17 Two Hansson pins versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 17.5]
Analysis 17.5. Comparison 17 Two Hansson pins versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 5 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 17.6]
Analysis 17.6. Comparison 17 Two Hansson pins versus Rydell four-flanged nail, Outcome 6 Mortality - 2 years.
[Analysis 18.1]
Analysis 18.1. Comparison 18 Two Hansson pins versus sliding hip screw, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 18.2]
Analysis 18.2. Comparison 18 Two Hansson pins versus sliding hip screw, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 18.3]
Analysis 18.3. Comparison 18 Two Hansson pins versus sliding hip screw, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 18.4]
Analysis 18.4. Comparison 18 Two Hansson pins versus sliding hip screw, Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 18.5]
Analysis 18.5. Comparison 18 Two Hansson pins versus sliding hip screw, Outcome 5 Mortality - 2 years.
[Analysis 18.6]
Analysis 18.6. Comparison 18 Two Hansson pins versus sliding hip screw, Outcome 6 Length of surgery.
[Analysis 19.1]
Analysis 19.1. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 1 Non-union.
[Analysis 19.2]
Analysis 19.2. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 2 Avascular necrosis.
[Analysis 19.3]
Analysis 19.3. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 3 All fracture healing complications.
[Analysis 19.4]
Analysis 19.4. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 4 Re-operations - arthroplasty.
[Analysis 19.5]
Analysis 19.5. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 5 Re-operation - arthroplasty or need for arthroplasty.
[Analysis 19.6]
Analysis 19.6. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 6 Re-operations - implant removal.
[Analysis 19.7]
Analysis 19.7. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 7 Re-operations - type not specified.
[Analysis 19.8]
Analysis 19.8. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 8 Deep wound infection.
[Analysis 19.9]
Analysis 19.9. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 9 Superficial wound infection.
[Analysis 19.10]
Analysis 19.10. Comparison 19 Two Hansson pins versus cancellous screws, Outcome 10 Mortality.