Purpose::By comparing the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty with hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients with a femoral neck fracture to investigate the one-year mortality, dislocation, infection, reoperation rate, and thromboembolic event.Methods::The PubMed, EMBASE databases, and Cochrane library were systematically searched from the inception dates to April 1, 2020 for relevant randomized controlled trials in English language using the keywords: “total hip arthroplasty” , “hemiarthroplasty” and “femoral neck fracture” to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Two reviewers independently selected articles, extracted data, assessed the quality evidence and risk bias of included trials using the Cochrane Collaboration’ stools, and discussed any disagreements. The third reviewer was consulted for any doubts or uncertainty. We derived risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Mortality was defined as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were other complications, dislocation, infection, reoperation rate, and thromboembolic event.Results::This meta-analysis included 10 studies with 1419 patients, which indicated that there were no significant differences between hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty in reoperation, infection rate, and thromboembolic event. However, there was a lower mortality and dislocation rate association with total hip arthroplasty at the one-year follow-up.Conclusion::Based on our results, we found that total hip arthroplasty was better than hemiarthroplasty for a hip fracture at one-year follow-up.“,”Purpose::By comparing the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty with hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients with a femoral neck fracture to investigate the one-year mortality, dislocation, infection, reoperation rate, and thromboembolic event.Methods::The PubMed, EMBASE databases, and Cochrane library were systematically searched from the inception dates to April 1, 2020 for relevant randomized controlled trials in English language using the keywords: “total hip arthroplasty” , “hemiarthroplasty” and “femoral neck fracture” to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Two reviewers independently selected articles, extracted data, assessed the quality evidence and risk bias of included trials using the Cochrane Collaboration’ stools, and discussed any disagreements. The third reviewer was consulted for any doubts or uncertainty. We derived risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Mortality was defined as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were other complications, dislocation, infection, reoperation rate, and thromboembolic event.Results::This meta-analysis included 10 studies with 1419 patients, which indicated that there were no significant differences between hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty in reoperation, infection rate, and thromboembolic event. However, there was a lower mortality and dislocation rate association with total hip arthroplasty at the one-year follow-up.Conclusion::Based on our results, we found that total hip arthroplasty was better than hemiarthroplasty for a hip fracture at one-year follow-up.