Skip to main content

Letter to the Editors: Comparing surgical interventions for intertrochanteric hip fracture by blood loss and operation time: a network meta-analysis

Recently, we read the publication written by Zhengan Hao and his colleagues with great interest (Hao Z, Wang X and Zhang X. Comparing surgical interventions for intertrochanteric hip fracture by blood loss and operation time: a network meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 Jun 22;13(1):157). The authors carried out a meta-analysis to help surgeons choose the appropriate treatments for patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures through the perspectives of blood loss and operation times. However, we have to point out several deficiencies of this study, as some of them might lead to the bias of conclusions. Firstly, we noted that the numerical sequences of included studies in the text were inconsistent with that in the reference list. It would make readers hard to find the reference they are interested in. Secondly, in our opinion, it might be better to exclude the publication written by Garg et al. (2011) [1] in this meta-analysis, as it was retracted in 2012 due to infringements of professional ethical codes [2]. Thirdly, it is worth to note that there might be an overlapping part of patients in this meta-analysis, because three articles involved in this study actually come from the same department during an overlapping period [3,4,5]. Finally, the authors stated that they extracted the blood loss from each study by measuring the change from baseline. In our view, the authors should describe more details on this issue, because the measurement methods of blood loss among the studies were inconsistent. For example, Kosygan et al. used the postoperative fall of Hb (g%) to present the blood loss [6]. In Ahrengart et al.’s study, the blood loss was composed by different parts, including hemoglobin at admission, perioperative blood loss, blood loss to drainage, number of blood transfusions, and hemoglobin 1 week postoperatively [7]. However, Changyou et al. only reported the intraoperative bleeding in their study [8]. As the deficiencies we mentioned above, the conclusions of this review might be limited.

References

  1. 1.

    Garg B, Marimuthu K, Kumar V, Malhotra R, Kotwal PP. Outcome of short proximal femoral nail antirotation and dynamic hip screw for fixation of unstable trochanteric fractures. A randomised prospective comparative trial. Hip Int. 2011;21:531–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Spencer RF. Retraction: “Outcome of short proximal femoral nail antirotation and dynamic hip screw for fixation of unstable trochanteric fractures. A randomised prospective comparative trial” [Hip Int 2011; 21(05): 531-6]. Hip Int. 2012;22:487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Yaozeng X, Dechun G, Huilin Y, Guangming Z, Xianbin W. Comparative study of trochanteric fracture treated with the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation and the third generation of gamma nail. Injury. 2010;41:1234–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Xu YZ, Geng DC, Mao HQ, Zhu XS, Yang HL. A comparison of the proximal femoral nail antirotation device and dynamic hip screw in the treatment of unstable pertrochanteric fracture. J Int Med Res. 2010;38:1266–75.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Zou J, Xu Y, Yang H. A comparison of proximal femoral nail antirotation and dynamic hip screw devices in trochanteric fractures. J Int Med Res. 2009;37:1057–64.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Kosygan KP, Mohan R, Newman RJ. 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. 2002;84:19–22.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Ahrengart L, Tornkvist H, Fornander P, Thorngren KG, Pasanen L, Wahlstrom P, et al. A randomized study of the compression hip screw and Gamma nail in 426 fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002:209–22.

  8. 8.

    Changyou T, Zhong X, Xiang S. Prospective study of artificial femoral head replacement and DHS internal fixation for comminuted femoral intertrochanteric fractures in elderly patients. Chin J Bone Joint Injury. 2009:6.

Download references

Acknowledgements

None.

Funding

None.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

PL wrote this manuscript, DX and WG reviewed the selected studies in Hao et al.’s review. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peng Luo.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luo, P., Xu, D. & Guo, W.J. Letter to the Editors: Comparing surgical interventions for intertrochanteric hip fracture by blood loss and operation time: a network meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 14, 144 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1195-9

Download citation