Wu X, Gao B. Meta-analysis of the clinical efficacy of the Gamma3 nail vs Gamma3U-blade system in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. World J Orthop 2024; 15(3): 285-292 [PMID: 38596186 DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v15.i3.285]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Bo Gao, Doctor, Surgeon, Department of Orthopedic, The Affiliated Taizhou Second People's Hospital of Yangzhou University, No. 27 Jiankang Road, Jiangyan District, Taizhou 225500, Jiangsu Province, China. gaobo305@163.com
Research Domain of This Article
Orthopedics
Article-Type of This Article
Meta-Analysis
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Orthop. Mar 18, 2024; 15(3): 285-292 Published online Mar 18, 2024. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v15.i3.285
Meta-analysis of the clinical efficacy of the Gamma3 nail vs Gamma3U-blade system in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures
Xuan Wu, Bo Gao
Xuan Wu, Department of Orthopedic, Zhong Da Hospital, School of Medicine, Southeast University, Nanjing 210000, Jiangsu Province, China
Bo Gao, Department of Orthopedic, The Affiliated Taizhou Second People's Hospital of Yangzhou University, Taizhou 225500, Jiangsu Province, China
Author contributions: Wu X Collect all the literature required for the study, provided the data analysis of the article, and put forward important opinions and suggestions on the discussion part of the article; Gao B participated in the study of the background part of the article, collated and revised the content of the article; Bo G provided financial support as the host of the project.
Supported byThe Clinical Medical Science and Technology Development Fund Project of Jiangsu University, No. JLY2021185.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
PRISMA 2009 Checklist statement: The authors have read the PRISMA 2009 Checklist, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the PRISMA 2009 Checklist.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Bo Gao, Doctor, Surgeon, Department of Orthopedic, The Affiliated Taizhou Second People's Hospital of Yangzhou University, No. 27 Jiankang Road, Jiangyan District, Taizhou 225500, Jiangsu Province, China. gaobo305@163.com
Received: December 1, 2023 Peer-review started: December 1, 2023 First decision: December 28, 2023 Revised: January 8, 2024 Accepted: February 5, 2024 Article in press: February 5, 2024 Published online: March 18, 2024
ARTICLE HIGHLIGHTS
Research background
The conventional Gamma3 nail remains the primary treatment for femoral intertrochanteric fractures. However, reports in the literature suggest that the Gamma3U-blade system enhances the stability of the Gamma3 nail and lessens complication rates. Yet, comparative studies between the Gamma3U-blade and Gamma3 systems are sparse. This meta-analysis was thus conducted to investigate the clinical efficacy of these two surgical methods.
Research motivation
To compare the clinical efficacy of Gamma3 and Gamma3 U-blade, and then to guide the clinical treatment.
Research objectives
Whether Gamma3 U-blade can replace Gamma3 nails, and whether there is room for further improvement.
Research methods
The article chooses the traditional meta-analysis, and its main purpose is to analyze the existing data and guide the clinical treatment.
Research results
The Gamma3 U-blade procedure is longer than the Gamma3, but both surgical procedures are safe and effective, and further clinical studies are needed to optimize the Gamma3 U-blade procedure.
Research conclusions
These insights may offer valuable recommendations and information for future surgical protocols in hip fracture patients. Nevertheless, to enhance the evidence base, further extensive multicenter prospective trials are necessary. A randomized controlled trial focusing on documented and quantified osteoporosis patients with extended follow-up periods is required.
Research perspectives
Comparative surgical studies of Gamma3 U-blade and Gamma3 are missing, and numerous clinical surgery and prospective studies are needed.
