Loading…

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Standard Versus Mini-Incision Posterior Approach to Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract The mini-incision posterior approach may appeal to surgeons comfortable with the standard posterior approach to the hip. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of these two approaches. Twelve randomised controlled trials and four non-randomised trials comprising of 1498 to...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Journal of arthroplasty 2014-10, Vol.29 (10), p.1970-1982
Main Authors: Berstock, James R., MBChB, MRCS, Blom, Ashley W., MD, PhD, FRCS (Tr&Orth), Beswick, Andrew D., BSc
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract The mini-incision posterior approach may appeal to surgeons comfortable with the standard posterior approach to the hip. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of these two approaches. Twelve randomised controlled trials and four non-randomised trials comprising of 1498 total hip arthroplasties were included. The mini-incision posterior approach was associated with an early improvement in Harris hip score of 1.8 points ( P < 0.001), reduced operating time (5 minutes, P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (14 hours, P < 0.001), intraoperative and total blood loss (63 ml, P < 0.001 and 119 ml, P < 0.001 respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of dislocation, nerve injury, infection or venous thromboembolic events. The minimally invasive posterior approach appears to provide a safe and acceptable alternative to the standard incision posterior approach.
ISSN:0883-5403
1532-8406
DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2014.05.021