Total Hip Arthroplasty or Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures?: Commentary on an article by Mina Tohidi, MD, FRCS(C), PhD, et al.: "Comparative Effectiveness of Total Hip Arthroplasty and Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture. A Propensity-Score-Matched Cohort Study".

Abstract

Commentary This Canadian study involves a subject of continued controversy1,2. It describes the outcomes of a large matched group of patients ≥60 years old with a displaced femoral neck fracture treated with total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hemiarthroplasty (HA). The 2 groups had similar revision and readmission rates, but those treated with THA had higher dislocation rates. Patients treated with HA had higher mortality rates, but they tended to be older and had higher rates of dementia and institutionalization. These findings are not new or unexpected, so what are surgeons to take away from this study? The major strength of this study is the use of a well-matched cohort with a large sample size (9,224). Most previous studies involved far fewer patients or performed meta-analyses of such studies3. Its major weakness is that surgeon and technical factors could not be taken into account. Who performs the surgery and how it is done are very important but were not captured in the data. In clinical practice, a femoral neck fracture is a devastating but common injury. Treatment should be based on shared decision-making involving the surgeon and the patient, family, or individual who has the power of attorney. These other individuals will ultimately rely heavily on the surgeon’s recommendations. The surgeon should clearly explain why a particular treatment is being recommended, along with the specific risks and benefits involved with each treatment. There are also many confounding factors that can influence the surgeon’s recommendation. These can include surgeon experience and comfort with the procedure, as well as institutional support for performing it at less than convenient hours (holidays, weekends). Age, comorbidities, anticipated life expectancy, approach, femoral component head size, use of a dual-mobility construct, bone quality, and use of cement all need to be taken into account. An institutionalized patient with Parkinson disease will be treated very differently from an active 70-year-old who lives at home. Some studies have not found significant differences between these 2 treatments, or have questioned the clinical importance of better quality-of-life scores after THA than after HA4. However, the pendulum is clearly swinging toward the use of THA for this injury5,6. This study provides further evidence that THA is a reasonable treatment for many displaced femoral neck fractures, but reinforces the need to consider factors that will reduce dislocation rates.