Hip fractures

Summary

Studies suggest that outcomes comparing percutaneous compression plating (PCCP) and hip screw (HS) for treatment of hip fractures are varied. Outcomes favoring PCCP include lower mean blood transfusion requirements and slightly lower postoperative pain. Both PCCP and HS are associated with low rates of implant failure, however, in the PCCP group implant failure and unplanned reoperations may be more common. Additional randomized controlled trials are recommended to verify these results.

Strength of evidence | Average methods score (out of 10)

• 1 Gotfried Y. 2003;  The Gotfried percutaneous compression plate compared with the conventional classic hip screw for the fixation of intertrochanteric fractures of the hip.  J Bone Joint Surg Br (England). 85 (1) 148
• 2 Kenzora KP, McCarthy RE, Lowell JD et al . 1984;  Hip fracture mortality: relation to age, treatment, preoperative illness, time of surgery, and complication.  Clin Orthop. 186 45-46
• 3 Gotfried Y, Cohen B, Rotem A. 2002;  Biomechanical evaluation of the percutaneous compression plating system for hip fractures.  J Orthop Trauma. 16 (9) 644-650
• 4 Peyser A, Brocke L, Weil Y, Mosheiff R, Liebergall M. Comparative study of PCCP and CHS devices for the fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures. To be presented at the The 72nd AAOS Annual meeting Feb 2005 Washington DC.