Published online Mar 18, 2024. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v15.i3.285
Peer-review started: December 1, 2023
First decision: December 28, 2023
Revised: January 8, 2024
Accepted: February 5, 2024
Article in press: February 5, 2024
Published online: March 18, 2024
Processing time: 104 Days and 18 Hours
The conventional Gamma3 nail remains the primary treatment for femoral intertrochanteric fractures. However, reports in the literature suggest that the Gamma3U-blade system enhances the stability of the Gamma3 nail and lessens complication rates. Yet, comparative studies between the Gamma3U-blade and Gamma3 systems are sparse. This meta-analysis was thus conducted to investigate the clinical efficacy of these two surgical methods.
To compare the clinical efficacy of Gamma3 and Gamma3 U-blade, and then to guide the clinical treatment.
Whether Gamma3 U-blade can replace Gamma3 nails, and whether there is room for further improvement.
The article chooses the traditional meta-analysis, and its main purpose is to analyze the existing data and guide the clinical treatment.
The Gamma3 U-blade procedure is longer than the Gamma3, but both surgical procedures are safe and effective, and further clinical studies are needed to optimize the Gamma3 U-blade procedure.
These insights may offer valuable recommendations and information for future surgical protocols in hip fracture patients. Nevertheless, to enhance the evidence base, further extensive multicenter prospective trials are necessary. A randomized controlled trial focusing on documented and quantified osteoporosis patients with extended follow-up periods is required.
Comparative surgical studies of Gamma3 U-blade and Gamma3 are missing, and numerous clinical surgery and prospective studies are needed.