A comparison of internal fixation and hemiarthroplasty in the management of un- or minimally displaced hip fractures in patients over 60 years old

Background The incidence of hip fractures in the elderly is increasing. Minimally displaced and undisplaced hip fractures can be treated with either internal fixation or hemiarthroplasty. Objectives To identify the revision rate of internal fixation and hemiarthroplasty in patients 60 years or older with Garden I or II hip fractures and to identify risk factors associated with each method. Method A retrospective analysis was conducted from 2 Major Trauma Centres and 9 Trauma Units between 01/01/2015 and 31/12/2020. Patients managed conservatively, treated with a total hip replacement and missing data were excluded from the study. Results 1273 patients were included of which 26.2% (n = 334) had cannulated hip fixation (CHF), 19.4% (n = 247) had a dynamic hip screw (DHS) and 54.7% (n = 692) had a hemiarthroplasty. 66 patients in total (5.2%) required revision surgery. The revision rates for CHF, DHS and hemiarthroplasty were 14.4%, 4%, 1.2% (p<0.001) respectively. Failed fixation was the most common reason for revision with the incidence increasing by 7-fold in the CHF group [45.8% (n = 23) vs. 33.3% (n = 3) in DHS; p<0.01]. The risk factors identified for CHF revision were age >80 (p<0.05), female gender (p<0.05) and smoking (p<0.05). The average length of hospital stay was decreased when using CHF compared to DHS and hemiarthroplasty (12.6 days vs 14.9 days vs 18.1 days respectively, p<0.001) and the 1 year mortality rate for CHF, DHS and hemiarthroplasty was 2.5%, 2% and 9% respectively. Conclusions Fixation methods for Garden I and II hip fractures in elderly patients are associated with a higher revision rate than hemiarthroplasty. CHF has the highest revision rate at 14.4% followed by DHS and hemiarthroplasty. Female patients, patients over the age of 80 and patients with poor bone quality are considered high risk for fixation failure with CHF. Hemiarthroplasty is a suitable alternative with lowest revision rates. When considering an internal fixation method, DHS is more robust than a screw construct.