To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Intertrochanteric fracture: Percutaneous compression plate superior to dynamic hip screw

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
May 2013

Intertrochanteric fracture: Percutaneous compression plate superior to dynamic hip screw

Vol: 2| Issue: 4| Number:141| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Meta-analysis/Systematic Review
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

The percutaneous compression plate versus the dynamic hip screw for treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012 Nov;98(7):773-83. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2012.07.004. Epub 2012 Oct 6

Contributing Authors:
J Ma D Xing X Ma W Xu J Wang Y Chen D Song

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

9 studies were included in this meta-analysis comparing treatment using percutaneous compression plates (PCCP) and dynamic hip screws (DHS) in patients with intertrochanteric femoral fractures. A total of 914 patients were identified from the 9 studies. Results from the analysis indicated that PCCP was superior to DHS with respect to operation time, blood loss, and rate of cardiovascular events. T...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue