Skip to main content

Table 2 Characteristics of included studies in the meta-analysis

From: Is hip fracture surgery safe for patients on antiplatelet drugs and is it necessary to delay surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis

StudyCountryStudy typeQuality assessmentDurationSample sizeGroupsFemale (%)Age (year)aTime to surgery (day)aFracture typeConcurrent antiplatelet or thromboprophylaxis
Al Khudairy et al. [25]IrelandCohort (retrospective)**** * ***24 months47Early VS delayed66%80.3 (8.3)4.2 (1.0) VS 8.0 (1.0)Intra and extracapsularUnclear
Chechik et al. [26]IsraelQuasi-randomized (retrospective)**** * ***34 months60Early VS delayed50%82.5 (7.9)1.67 (1.0) VS 7.5 (2.70)Intra and extracapsular33% in early group and 17% in delayed group on aspirin 40 mg LMWH for thromboprophylaxis
Cox et al. [27]UKCohort (retrospective)**** _ **2 years20Early VS delayed65%80.91.1 VS 7Intra and extracapsularChemical or mechanical thromboprophylaxis
Johansen et al. [28]UKCohort (retrospective)**** _ **18 months17Early VS delayedUnclearUnclear2.7 VS 7.3UnclearUnclear
Pailleret et al. [29]FranceCohort (retrospective)**** ** **6 years39Early VS delayed77%86 (7.5)1 (1) VS 5 (1)Intra and extracapsular24% in early group and 32% in delayed group on aspirin 40 mg LMWH for thromboprophylaxis
Sa-Ngasoongsong et al. [30]ThailandCohort (prospective and retrospective)**** * ***3 years94Early VS delayed73%80.5 (8.0)1.6 (0.9) VS 8.9 (3.6)Intra and extracapsular42 aspirin and 7 clopidogrel in early group, 36 aspirin, and 9 clopidogrel in delayed group
Yoo et al. [31]KoreaCohort (retrospective)**** * ***3 years43Early VS delayed70%73.0 (7.1)< 1 days VS 5.7IntracapsularMechanical thromboprophylaxis was used and chemical prophylactic agents were not
Sim et al. [32]AustraliaCohort (retrospective)**** * ***44 months1351) Early VS delayed
2) Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet
76%80.7 (9.7)1) < 5 days VS > 5 days
2) 3.5 (3.2) VS 0.9 (0.8)
Intra and extracapsularUnclear
Zehir et al. [33]TurkeyCohort (retrospective)**** * ***6 years2111) Early VS delayed
2) Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet
55%77.5 (7.6)1) 1.79 VS 5.82
2) 1.79 VS 1.68
Intracapsular40 mg LMWH for thromboprophylaxis
Anekstein et al. [34]IsraelCohort (prospective)**** ** ***14 months104Antiplatelet VS no antiplateletUnclear77.1 (10.1)1.53 (0.9) VS 1.48 (0.9)Intra and extracapsularUnclear
Chechik et al. [35]IsraelCohort (prospective)**** * ***21 months88Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet66%81.8 (7.4)2.15 (1.4) VS 1.88 (1.1)Intra and extracapsularUnclear
Collinge et al. [36]USACohort (retrospective)**** ** **5 years946Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet72%80.8 (8.7)1.54 (1.0) VS 1.55 (0.9)Intra and extracapsularA prophylactic doses of enoxaparin (Lovenox) within 24 h after surgery
Feely et al. [37]USACohort (retrospective)**** ** ***14 years and 6 months120Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet55%82.2 (8.4)1.1 (0.7) VS 1.3 (1.3)Intra and extracapsular2 cohorts had similar percentages of patients concurrent on aspirin and chemical thromboprophylaxis
Ghanem et al. [38]USACohort (retrospective)**** * **8 years623Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet69%83.11.7 VS 1.3Intracapsular48% with aspirin in clopidogrel group, 38% in control group. A prophylaxis of enoxaparin was 22% in clopidogrel group and 30% in control group
Ginsel et al. [39]AustraliaCohort (retrospective)**** * ***1 year300Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet71%81.6 (13.1)1.76 VS 1.6IntracapsularUnclear
Kennedy et al. [40]IrelandCohort (retrospective)**** _ **NR98Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet73%81.9All patients < 2 daysIntra and extracapsularUnclear
Kragh et al. [41]SwedenCohort (retrospective)**** * **2 years255Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet54%82.4 (8.8)0.84 (0.4) VS 0.8 (0.4)Intra and extracapsular40 mg enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis, 47% with compression bandage in antiplatelet group and 43% in non-antiplatelet group
Thaler et al. [42]AustriaCohort (prospective)**** * ***27 months462Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet74%78 (11)1.29 (1.9) VS 1.3 (2.0)Intra and extracapsular14% of clopidogrel group and 22% control group on aspirin. 40 mg enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis
Clareus et al. [43]SwedenCohort (retrospective)**** ** ***3 years112Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet68%84.7 (7.3)1.67 (1.2) VS 0.88 (0.5)Intra and extracapsularUnclear
Hossain et al. [44]UKCohort (retrospective)**** ** **2 years102Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet81%83.0 (7.5)All patients < 2 daysIntracapsular32% of clopidogrel group and 44% control group on aspirin.
40 mg enoxaparin postoperatively for 6 weeks for thromboprophylaxis
Manaqibwala et al. [45]USACohort (retrospective)**** ** **7 years162Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet69%84.1 (8.9)2.3 (2.0) VS 1.9 (2.9)Intracapsular66.7% of clopidogrel group and 43.5% control group on aspirin 40 mg enoxaparin or 5000 units heparin postoperatively for thromboprophylaxis
Nydick et al. [46]USACohort (retrospective)**** ** *5 years50Antiplatelet VS no antiplateletUnclearUnclear1.81 VS 1.65Intra and extracapsularUnclear
Wallace et al. [47]USACohort (retrospective)**** ** ***Over 5 years110Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet73%79.9 (9.1)All patients < 2 daysIntra and extracapsularMechanical thromboprophylaxis was used and chemical prophylactic agents were not
Wordsworth et al. [48]UKCohort (prospective)**** * ***6 years1225Antiplatelet VS no antiplatelet72%82.3 (9.4)1.23 VS 1.20Intra and extracapsular36.7% of clopidogrel group and 20% control group on aspirin 40 mg enoxaparin postoperatively for 2-4 weeks for thromboprophylaxis
  1. A star system is used to allow a semi-quantitative assessment of study quality by using Newcastle/Ottawa scale
  2. LMWH = low molecular weight heparin
  3. 5 or more stars for selection, _ = zero score for this domain, * = 1 point within this domain
  4. aValues are mean (standard deviation)