Abstract:To the Editor: We read with interest the article, ‘‘Systematic Review of Cemented and Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty Outcomes for Femoral Neck Fractures’’ by Ahn et al. [1], which concluded there was no significant difference between cemented and uncemented techniques for reported outcome measurements of femoral neck fractures. Respecting the highly influential status of systematic review in the hierarchy of evidence, we wish to bring attention to three important issues. First, seven trials, two randomized controlled trials [RCT] [15, 16], and five retrospective trials [6, 8, 14, 18, 19] could have been retrieved and included in the meta-analysis. In addition, one RCT [2] was retrieved but not included. The authors arbitrarily searched the literature after 1980 while missing two classic trials [15, 19] before 1980. As a result, there is a definite bias of selection that may lead to an inappropriate conclusion. Unfortunately, no detailed reasons were provided to justify their search strategy. Second, we would like to offer some observations regarding their data extraction (see Supplementary website material) and pooled analysis. (1) The data referring to Eiskjaer et al. [4] was in fact extracted from another article from Eiskjaer and Østgård [5]. A similar instance is seen with Lausten et al. [12], which should be replaced by the earlier article by Lausten and Vedel [11]. (2) It appears the authors neglected the cemented group with Hastings prosthesis in the article by Eiskjaer and Østgård [5]. The mortality of this group was not included. Also, neither the revision rate nor the followup was extracted. (3) Gebhard et al. [8] reported six revisions in each group by 1 year. However, these data were mistakenly included in the column, ‘‘Complication’’ of their Supplementary Website Material. (4) The authors failed to explain why 15 cemented cases and 61 uncemented cases with thigh pain were not included in the subgroup of Lo et al. [13]. (5) In the report by Sonne-Holm et al. [17], 11 deaths that occurred in each group by 6 weeks were not listed in their Supplementary Website Material. Also, Sonne-Holm et al. noted only 30% of the patients with cemented prostheses (12 patients) reported pain compared with 60% of the patients with uncemented prostheses (21 patients) after 6 months. The result contradicts those of 23 cases versus 13 cases extracted by Ahn et al. [1]. (6) There were actually three revisions reported by Dorr et al. [3] instead of four revisions. (7) The correct order of Fig. 2 in the metaanalysis [1] should be ‘‘(A) intermediate mortality,’’ ‘‘(B) long-term mortality,’’ ‘‘(C) perioperative mortality,’’ ‘‘(D) complications,’’ ‘‘(E) pain,’’ and ‘‘(F) revision.’’ (8) The mortality data within 1 month by Foster et al. [7] should (Re: Ahn J, Man LX, Park S, Sodl JF, Esterhai JL. Systematic review of cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty outcomes for femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008 Jul 24. [Epub ahead of print]) (Editor’s note: A reply was requested from Ahn et al.; however, none was received.)

Response to Letter to the Editor on "Does the Use of Tranexamic Acid in Patients Who Have Preoperative Coagulopathy Undergoing Total Joint Arthroplasty Normalize Their Risk of Complications? A Matched Equivalence Analysis"

Application of postoperative autotransfusion in total joint arthroplasty reduces allogeneic blood requirements: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Do we really need tranexamic acid in total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis of nineteen randomized controlled trials

A literature review assessing the perioperative efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in elective total hip and knee arthroplasty in UK practice

Effectiveness And Safety Of Tranexamic Acid In Reducing Blood Loss In Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis

Letter to the Editor: Cemented Hemiarthroplasty Confers Less Pain and Better Mobility Than Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty.

A Matched Cohort Analysis of 144,344 Patients

Clinical Use of Tranexamic Acid in High Tibial Osteotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Comparison of oral versus intravenous tranexamic acid in total knee and hip arthroplasty: A GRADE analysis and meta-analysis

Evaluation of tranexamic acid after total hip arthroplasty over 60 years old in China: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Variable Efficacy of Tranexamic Acid in Geriatric Hip Fractures Treated With Arthroplasty Versus Cephalomedullary Nails

Tranexamic acid in hip hemiarthroplasty surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Synergistic effects of intravenous and intra-articular tranexamic acid on reducing hemoglobin loss in revision total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled study.

Impact Of Tranexamic Acid And Autologous Blood Transfusion On Postoperative Complications After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Reply to Comment on Li Et Al.: Non-continuous Versus Continuous Wound Drainage after Total Knee Arthroplasty: a Meta-Analysis

Ninety-Day Outcomes in Primary Hypercoagulable Disease Patients Undergoing Total Joint Arthroplasty Vs Normal: A Matched Case-Control Series

Efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in hip fracture surgery: A comparative study of 613 patients

The Value of Tranexamic Acid for Patients with Preoperative Anemia in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

The Use of Tranexamic Acid for Primary Prophylaxis of Heterotopic Ossification Following Total Hip Arthroplasty

Blood loss and limb circumference changes in patients undergoing unilateral total knee arthroplasty after intra-articular injection of tranexamic acid:a randomized controlled trial

Use of Tranexamic Acid to Reduce PostOperative Bleeding in Orthopaedic Oncology