Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

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 (for every 5-point increase) (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02-1.39; P = 0.027), displaced fracture (HR 2.16, 95% CI 1.44-3.23; P < 0.001), unacceptable quality of implant placement (HR 2.70, 95% CI 1.59-4.55; P < 0.001), and smokers treated with cancellous screws versus smokers treated with a sliding hip screw (HR 2.94, 95% CI 1.35-6.25; P = 0.006). Additionally, for every 10-year decrease in age, participants experienced an average increased risk of 39% for hardware removal. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study may inform future research by identifying high-risk patients who may be better treated with arthroplasty and may benefit from adjuncts to care (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.05-1.85; P = 0.020). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Original publication




Conference paper

Publication Date





223 - 230


Aged, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Device Removal, Female, Femoral Neck Fractures, Fracture Fixation, Internal, Fracture Healing, Humans, Male, Prognosis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Reoperation, Risk Factors, Treatment Outcome