Abstract
The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the fixation outcome of the Gamma nail and dynamic hip screw (DHS) in treating peritrochanteric fractures. Relevant randomised controlled studies were included, and the search strategy followed the requirements of the Cochrane Library Handbook. Methodological quality was assessed and data were extracted independently. Seven studies involving 1,257 fractures were included which compared the effect of the Gamma nail and DHS. The results showed a higher rate of postoperative femoral shaft fracture with the Gamma nail compared to the DHS [relative risk (RR): 7.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.83–18.70, P < 0.0001] but no statistical differences in wound infection (RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.56–1.86), mortality (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.81–1.24), re-operation (RR: 1.64, 95% CI: 0.91–2.95) and walking independently after rehabilitation (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.60–1.33). It seemed that there were no obvious advantages of the Gamma nail over the DHS in treating peritrochanteric fractures.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Clawson DK (1964) Trochanteric fractures treated by the sliding screw plate fixation method. J Trauma 4:737–752
Kyle RF, Gustilo RB, Premer RF (1979) Analysis of six hundred and twenty-two intertrochanteric hip fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 61:216–221
Schipper IB, Marti RK, van der Werken C (2004) Unstable trochanteric femoral fractures: extramedullary or intramedullary fixation. Review of literature. Injury 35:142–151
Davis TR, Sher JL, Horsman A et al (1990) Intertrochanteric femoral fractures. Mechanical failure after internal fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72:26–31
Parker MJ (1992) Cutting-out of the dynamic hip screw related to its position. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74:625
Sadowski C, Lübbeke A, Saudan M, Riand N, Stern R, Hoffmeyer P (2002) Treatment of reverse oblique and transverse intertrochanteric fractures with use of an intramedullary nail or a 95 degrees screw-plate: a prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A:372–381
Zlowodzki M, Bhandari M, Brown GA (2006) Misconceptions about the mechanical advantages of intramedullary devices for treatment of proximal femur fractures. Acta Orthop 77:169–170
Park SR, Kang JS, Kim HS, Lee WH, Kim YH (1998) Treatment of intertrochanteric fracture with the Gamma AP locking nail or by a compression hip screw—a randomised prospective trial. Int Orthop 22:157–160
O’Brien PJ, Meek RN, Blachut PA, Broekhuyse HM, Sabharwal S (1995) Fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures: gamma nail versus dynamic hip screw. A randomized, prospective study. Can J Surg 38:516–520
Adams CI, Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM (2001) Prospective randomized controlled trial of an intramedullary nail versus dynamic screw and plate for intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. J Orthop Trauma 15:394–400
Leung KS, So WS, Shen WY, Hui PW (1992) Gamma nails and dynamic hip screws for peritrochanteric fractures. A randomised prospective study in elderly patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74:345–351
Bridle SH, Patel AD, Bircher M, Calvert PT (1991) Fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. A randomised prospective comparison of the gamma nail and the dynamic hip screw. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:330–334
Radford PJ, Needoff M, Webb JK (1993) A prospective randomised comparison of the dynamic hip screw and the gamma locking nail. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75(5):789–793
Aune AK, Ekeland A, Odegaard B, Grøgaard B, Alho A (1994) Gamma nail vs compression screw for trochanteric femoral fractures. 15 reoperations in a prospective, randomized study of 378 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 65:127–130
Parker MJ, Handoll HHG (2004) Gamma and other cephalocondylic intramedullary nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester
Madsen JE, Naess L, Aune AK, Alho A, Ekeland A, Strømsøe K (1998) Dynamic hip screw with trochanteric stabilizing plate in the treatment of unstable proximal femoral fractures: a comparative study with the Gamma nail and compression hip screw. J Orthop Trauma 12(1):241–248
Butt MS, Krikler SJ, Nafie S, Ali MS (1995) Comparison of dynamic hip screw and gamma nail: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Injury 26(2):615–618
Ecker ML, Joyce JJ 3rd, Kohl EJ (1975) The treatment of trochanteric hip fractures using a compressing screw. J Bone Joint Surg Am 57(1):23–27
Jensen JS, Sonne-Holm S, Tøndevold E (1980) Unstable trochanteric fractures. A comparative analysis of four methods of internal fixation. Acta Orthop Scand 51(6):949–962
Jones HW, Johnston P, Parker M (2006) Are short femoral nails superior to the sliding hip screw? A meta-analysis of 24 studies involving 3,279 fractures. Int Orthop 30:69–78
Moher D, Pham B, Klassen TP, Schulz KF, Berlin JA, Jadad AR, Liberati A (2000) What contributions do languages other than English make on the results of meta-analyses? J Clin Epidemiol 53(3):964–972
Cook DJ, Sackett DL, Spitzer WO (1995) Methodologic guidelines for systematic reviews of randomized control trials in health care from the Potsdam Consultation on Meta-Analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 48(1):167–171
Bailar JC 3rd (1997) The promise and problems of meta-analysis. N Engl J Med 337(8):559–561
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by National Basic Research Program of China (Contract Grant No. G2005cb623901) and by National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (30271317).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, M., Yang, Z., Pei, F. et al. A meta-analysis of the Gamma nail and dynamic hip screw in treating peritrochanteric fractures. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 34, 323–328 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0783-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0783-4