Outcomes of total hip arthroplasty using collared versus collarless uncemented HA-coated stems: a meta-analysis

center dot Purpose: to systematically review comparative studies reporting revision rates, clinical outcomes, or radiographic outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) using collared versus collarless conventional -length uncemented hydroxyapatite (HA) -coated stems. center dot Methods: In adherence with PRISMA guidelines, a literature search was performed on Medline, Embase, and Scopus. Comparative clinical studies were eligible if they reported outcomes of collared versus collarless uncemented HA -coated stems for primary THA. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full -texts to determine eligibility; then performed data extraction; and assessed the quality of studies according to Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist. center dot Results: The search returned 972 records, 486 were duplicates, and 479 were excluded after title/abstract/fulltext screening. Three further studies were included from the references of eligible studies and from discussions with subject matter experts, resulting in 11 included studies. The JBI checklist indicated six studies scored >= 7 points and four studies >= 4 points. Pooled data revealed collared stems had significantly lower revision rates (OR = 0.45; 95% CI = 0.31-0.64) and subsidence (MD = -1 mm; 95% CI = -1.6--0.3), but no significant difference in intraoperative complication rates (OR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.67-1.32) in the short term to mid-term. Unpooled data indicated that collared stems provide equivalent survival, equivalent or better outcomes, and equivalent or lower complication rates. center dot Conclusion: In comparative studies, collared stems have lower revision rates than collarless stems, as well as equivalent or better clinical and radiographic outcomes. Differences could be due to a protective effect that the collar offers against subsidence, particularly in undersized or misaligned stems. Further studies are warranted to confirm long-term results and better understand differences between registry data and clinical studies.