Robertson GA, Wood AM. Hip hemi-arthroplasty for neck of femur fracture: What is the current evidence? World J Orthop 2018; 9(11): 235-244 [PMID: 30479970 DOI: 10.5312/wjo.v9.i11.235]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Greg AJ Robertson, BSc, MBChB, MSc, Surgeon, Edinburgh Orthopaedic Trauma Unit, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, Scotland EH16 4SA, United Kingdom. greg_robertson@live.co.uk
Research Domain of This Article
Orthopedics
Article-Type of This Article
Editorial
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. Nov 18, 2018; 9(11): 235-244 Published online Nov 18, 2018. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v9.i11.235
Hip hemi-arthroplasty for neck of femur fracture: What is the current evidence?
Greg AJ Robertson, Alexander M Wood
Greg AJ Robertson, Edinburgh Orthopaedic Trauma Unit, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, Scotland EH16 4SA, United Kingdom
Alexander M Wood, Orthopaedic Department, Leeds General Infirmary, Great George St, Leeds LS1 3EX, United Kingdom
Author contributions: Robertson GA and Wood AM wrote and edited the manuscript.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors have no conflict of interests.
Open-Access: 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/
Correspondence to: Greg AJ Robertson, BSc, MBChB, MSc, Surgeon, Edinburgh Orthopaedic Trauma Unit, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, Scotland EH16 4SA, United Kingdom. greg_robertson@live.co.uk
Telephone: +44-131-2423545 Fax: +44-131-2423541
Received: July 10, 2018 Peer-review started: July 10, 2018 First decision: July 31, 2018 Revised: August 7, 2018 Accepted: October 9, 2018 Article in press: October 9, 2018 Published online: November 18, 2018 Processing time: 128 Days and 22.2 Hours
Core Tip
Core tip: From the current evidence on hip hemi-arthroplasty, the following conclusions can be drawn: posterior approaches are associated with higher rates of dislocation and should be avoided; there is no significant difference between unipolar and bipolar hemi-arthroplasty for surgical outcome, complication profile, functional outcome and long-term acetabular-erosion rates, therefore unipolar hemi-arthroplasty, the cheaper prosthesis, is the recommended option; cemented hemi-arthroplasty, the recommended option, has lower rates of implant-related complications and residual thigh pain compared to uncemented hemi-arthroplasty, with no significant difference in medical complications or mortality; there is no significant difference in wound-infections rates or healing outcomes between staples and sutures.
