Skip to main content

Table 1 The characteristics of included studies

From: Comparison of clinical outcomes with proximal femoral nail anti-rotation versus InterTAN nail for intertrochanteric femoral fractures: a meta-analysis

Study, year

PFNAa/ITb

Length of follow-up (months)

Type of studye,f

Sample size

Age (years)

Gender (% male)

Fracture type (number)

AO/OTA-A1c

AO/OTA-A2

AO/OTA-A3

Duramaz, 2019 [20]

100/86

PFNAII = 61.0 ± 16.6

IT = 61.5 ± 15.8

43.6d

28/34

49/32

23/20

25.9

RS

Gavaskar, 2018 [21]

50/50

PFNAII = 78 ± 8

IT = 77 ± 7

42.0/42.0

0/0

31/31

19/19

12

RS

Seyhan, 2015 [14]

43/32

PFNA = 75.9 ± 13.77

IT = 75.3 ± 13.52

25.6/25.0

44142

16/13

44181

19.4 (mean)

RCT

Wang, 2013 [22]

36/20

PFNAII = 76.8 ± 9.5

IT = 73.5 ± 11.3

47.2/55

7/2

26/13

3/5

4.1 (mean)

RS

Yu, 2016 [23]

72/75

PFNAII = 74.2 ± 9.1

IT = 75.2 ± 8.8

44.4/46.7

0/0

35/40

37/35

20 (mean)

RS

Zehir, 2015 [24]

96/102

PFNA = 77.2 ± 6.8

IT = 76.8 ± 6.7

38.5/38.2

0/0

92/93

43930

16.06/16.00

RS

Zhang, 2013 [25]

56/57

PFNAII = 72.4 ± 8.7

IT = 72.9 ± 7.6

33.9/40.4

0/0

45/45

44147

18.36

RCT

Zhang, 2017a [26]

88/86

PFNAII = 74.6 ± 6.3

IT = 72.7 ± 7.6

38.6/34.9

42/37

46/49

0/0

41.51/40.84

RS

Zhang, 2017b [27]

139/144

PFNA/IT = 76.1d

38.1/44.4

0/0

139/144

0/0

39.1/38.7

RS

  1. Data are presented as n or mean ± standard deviation
  2. aProximal femoral nail anti-rotation
  3. bInterTAN nail
  4. cArbeitsge-meinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association
  5. dPopulation parameters
  6. eRetrospective study
  7. fRandomized controlled trial