Fracture fixation in the operative management of hip fractures (FAITH): an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd Background Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. Methods For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. Findings Between March 3, 2008, and March 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 1108 patients to receive a sliding hip screw (n=557) or cancellous screws (n=551). Reoperations within 24 months did not differ by type of surgical fixation in those included in the primary analysis: 107 (20%) of 542 patients in the sliding hip screw group versus 117 (22%) of 537 patients in the cancellous screws group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·63–1·09; p=0·18). Avascular necrosis was more common in the sliding hip screw group than in the cancellous screws group (50 patients [9%] vs 28 patients [5%]; HR 1·91, 1·06–3·44; p=0·0319). However, no significant difference was found between the number of medically related adverse events between groups (p=0·82; appendix); these events included pulmonary embolism (two patients [\u3c1%] vs four [1%] patients; p=0·41) and sepsis (seven [1%] vs six [1%]; p=0·79). Interpretation In terms of reoperation rates the sliding hip screw shows no advantage, but some groups of patients (smokers and those with displaced or base of neck fractures) might do better with a sliding hip screw than with cancellous screws. Funding National Institutes of Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Stichting NutsOhra, Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Physicians\u27 Services Incorporated

Factors Associated with Revision Surgery after Internal Fixation of Hip Fractures

Background: Femoral neck fractures are associated with high rates of revision surgery after management with internal fixation. Using data from the Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trial evaluating methods of internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures, we investigated associations between baseline and surgical factors and the need for revision surgery to promote healing, relieve pain, treat infection or improve function over 24 months postsurgery. Additionally, we investigated factors associated with (1) hardware removal and (2) implant exchange from cancellous screws (CS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) to total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, or another internal fixation device. Methods: We identified 15 potential factors a priori that may be associated with revision surgery, 7 with hardware removal, and 14 with implant exchange. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses in our investigation. Results: Factors associated with increased risk of revision surgery included: female sex, [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.50; P = 0.001], higher body mass index (fo

Thromboprophylaxis with dabigatran after total hip arthroplasty in Indian patients: A subanalysis of a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized RE-NOVATE II study

In the Re-NOVATE II study, oral dabigatran provided thromboprophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty and improved compliance postdischarge in a global population. This article aims to identify trends (if any) in the Indian population. In this prospective, double-blind, double-dummy study, patients scheduled for primary, unilateral, elective total hip arthroplasty were randomized to 220 mg oral dabigatran once daily, starting with a 110 mg half-dose, 1–4 hours after surgery, or subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once daily, starting the evening before surgery. Each group received a placebo of the other study drug. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of total venous thromboembolism (VTE) and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome measures were composite of major VTE and VTE-related mortality during the treatment period. The major safety outcome was incidence of bleeding events. Of the 179 Indian patients randomized, 91 received oral dabigatran and 88 received subcutaneous enoxaparin for 28–35 days. Total VTE and all-cause mortality occurred in 18.7% of patients in the dabigatran group and 13.7% in the enoxaparin group [odds ratio = 1.4 (95% confidence interval 0.6, 3.5)]. Major VTE and VTE-related mortality was numerically lower in the dabigatran group (7.9%) compared with the enoxaparin group (9.9%). Safety outcomes were comparable between both groups. Dabigatran is an effective oral alternative to enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis as demonstrated by the RE-NOVATE II study global results. Data analyzed in Indian patients indicate comparable effects of dabigatran etexilate for major efficacy and safety outcomes

Thromboprophylaxis with dabigatran after total hip arthroplasty in Indian patients: A subanalysis of a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized RE-NOVATE II study

Objective: In the Re-NOVATE II study, oral dabigatran provided thromboprophylaxis after total hip arthroplasty and improved compliance postdischarge in a global population. This article aims to identify trends (if any) in the Indian population. Methods: In this prospective, double-blind, double-dummy study, patients scheduled for primary, unilateral, elective total hip arthroplasty were randomized to 220 mg oral dabigatran once daily, starting with a 110 mg half-dose, 1–4 hours after surgery, or subcutaneous enoxaparin 40 mg once daily, starting the evening before surgery. Each group received a placebo of the other study drug. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of total venous thromboembolism (VTE) and all-cause mortality. Secondary outcome measures were composite of major VTE and VTE-related mortality during the treatment period. The major safety outcome was incidence of bleeding events. Results: Of the 179 Indian patients randomized, 91 received oral dabigatran and 88 received subcutaneous enoxaparin for 28–35 days. Total VTE and all-cause mortality occurred in 18.7% of patients in the dabigatran group and 13.7% in the enoxaparin group [odds ratio = 1.4 (95% confidence interval 0.6, 3.5)]. Major VTE and VTE-related mortality was numerically lower in the dabigatran group (7.9%) compared with the enoxaparin group (9.9%). Safety outcomes were comparable between both groups. Conclusion: Dabigatran is an effective oral alternative to enoxaparin for thromboprophylaxis as demonstrated by the RE-NOVATE II study global results. Data analyzed in Indian patients indicate comparable effects of dabigatran etexilate for major efficacy and safety outcomes

Fracture fixation in the operative management of hip fractures (FAITH) : an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Background Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. Methods For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. Findings Between March 3, 2008, and March 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 1108 patients to receive a sliding hip screw (n=557) or cancellous screws (n=551). Reoperations within 24 months did not differ by type of surgical fixation in those included in the primary analysis: 107 (20%) of 542 patients in the sliding hip screw group versus 117 (22%) of 537 patients in the cancellous screws group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·63–1·09; p=0·18). Avascular necrosis was more common in the sliding hip screw group than in the cancellous screws group (50 patients [9%] vs 28 patients [5%]; HR 1·91, 1·06–3·44; p=0·0319). However, no significant difference was found between the number of medically related adverse events between groups (p=0·82; appendix); these events included pulmonary embolism (two patients [<1%] vs four [1%] patients; p=0·41) and sepsis (seven [1%] vs six [1%]; p=0·79). Interpretation In terms of reoperation rates the sliding hip screw shows no advantage, but some groups of patients (smokers and those with displaced or base of neck fractures) might do better with a sliding hip screw than with cancellous screws. Funding National Institutes of Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Stichting NutsOhra, Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Physicians' Services Incorporated

Fracture fixation in the operative management of hip fractures (FAITH) : an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Background Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. Methods For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. Findings Between March 3, 2008, and March 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 1108 patients to receive a sliding hip screw (n=557) or cancellous screws (n=551). Reoperations within 24 months did not differ by type of surgical fixation in those included in the primary analysis: 107 (20%) of 542 patients in the sliding hip screw group versus 117 (22%) of 537 patients in the cancellous screws group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·63–1·09; p=0·18). Avascular necrosis was more common in the sliding hip screw group than in the cancellous screws group (50 patients [9%] vs 28 patients [5%]; HR 1·91, 1·06–3·44; p=0·0319). However, no significant difference was found between the number of medically related adverse events between groups (p=0·82; appendix); these events included pulmonary embolism (two patients [<1%] vs four [1%] patients; p=0·41) and sepsis (seven [1%] vs six [1%]; p=0·79). Interpretation In terms of reoperation rates the sliding hip screw shows no advantage, but some groups of patients (smokers and those with displaced or base of neck fractures) might do better with a sliding hip screw than with cancellous screws. Funding National Institutes of Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Stichting NutsOhra, Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Physicians' Services Incorporated

Fracture fixation in the operative management of hip fractures (FAITH): an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial

Background Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. Methods For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. Findings Between Mar