Literature DB >> 14974039

Posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults with osteoarthritis.

B M Jolles1, E R Bogoch.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip is a progressive condition that has no cure and often requires a total hip arthroplasty (THA). The principal methods for THA are the posterior and direct lateral approaches. The posterior approach is considered to be easy to perform, however, increased rates of dislocation have been reported. The direct lateral approach facilitates cup positioning which may decrease rates of hip dislocation and diminishes the risk of injury to the sciatic nerve. However, there is an increased risk of limp. Dislocation of a hip prosthesis is a clinically important complication after THA, in terms of morbidity implications and costs.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the risks of prosthesis dislocation, postoperative Trendelenburg gait and sciatic nerve palsy after a posterior approach, compared to a direct lateral approach, for adult patients undergoing THA for primary OA. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL and Cochrane databases were searched until 2002. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published trials comparing posterior and direct lateral surgical approaches to THA in participants 18 years and older with a diagnosis of primary hip OA. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Retrieved articles were assessed independently by the two reviewers for their methodological quality. MAIN
RESULTS: Four prospective cohort studies involving 241 participants met the inclusion criteria. The primary outcome, dislocation, was reported in two studies. No significant difference between posterior and direct lateral surgical approach was found [1/77 (1.3%) versus 3/72 (4.2%); relative risk (RR) 0.35; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.04 to 3.22]. The presence of postoperative Trendelenburg gait was not significantly different between these surgical approaches. The risk of nerve palsy or injury was significantly higher among the direct lateral approaches [1/43 (2%) versus 10/49 (20%); RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.83]. However, there were no significant differences when comparing this risk nerve by nerve for both approaches, in particular for the sciatic nerve. Of the other outcomes considered only the average range of internal rotation in extension of the hip was significantly higher (weighted mean difference 16 degrees, 95% CI 8 to 23) in the posterior approach group (mean 35 degrees, standard deviation 13 degrees ) compared to the direct lateral approach (mean 19 degrees, standard deviation 13 degrees ). REVIEWER'S
CONCLUSIONS: The quality and quantity of information extracted from the trials performed to date are insufficient to make any firm conclusion on the optimum choice of surgical approach in adult patients undergoing primary THA for OA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14974039     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003828.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  11 in total

1.  Review: posterior soft tissue repair in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  F Bottner; P M Pellicci
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2006-02

Review 2.  [Hip dislocation following THA].

Authors:  F Mazoochian; M F Pietschmann; S Hocke; A Fottner; C V Schulze-Pellengahr; V Jansson
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Which approach for total hip arthroplasty: anterolateral or posterior?

Authors:  Jeya Palan; David J Beard; David W Murray; J G Andrew; John Nolan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The effect of posterior and lateral approach on patient-reported outcome measures and physical function in patients with osteoarthritis, undergoing total hip replacement: a randomised controlled trial protocol.

Authors:  Signe Rosenlund; Leif Broeng; Carsten Jensen; Anders Holsgaard-Larsen; Søren Overgaard
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2014-10-27       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  Surgical Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Vincent M Moretti; Zachary D Post
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.251

6.  Patient-reported outcome after total hip arthroplasty: comparison between lateral and posterior approach.

Authors:  Signe Rosenlund; Leif Broeng; Anders Holsgaard-Larsen; Carsten Jensen; Søren Overgaard
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2017-02-18       Impact factor: 3.717

7.  A Complication-Based Comparison Between the Posterior and Direct Lateral Approaches to Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Single-Center Experience.

Authors:  Wazzan ALJuhani; Khalid Alshuwaier; Fisal Alkhamis; Mohammed Q Alosaimi; Abdullah Alaidroos; Mohammad A Alghafees; Emad Masuadi
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2021-01-04

8.  Confronting hip resurfacing and big femoral head replacement gait analysis.

Authors:  Panagiotis K Karampinas; Dimitrios S Evangelopoulos; John Vlamis; Konstantinos Nikolopoulos; Dimitrios S Korres
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2014-03-26

9.  Minimally invasive anterior muscle-sparing versus a transgluteal approach for hemiarthroplasty in femoral neck fractures-a prospective randomised controlled trial including 190 elderly patients.

Authors:  Franziska Saxer; Patrick Studer; Marcel Jakob; Norbert Suhm; Rachel Rosenthal; Salome Dell-Kuster; Werner Vach; Nicolas Bless
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 3.921

10.  Supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPath) versus posterolateral total hip arthroplasty in bilateral osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a pilot clinical trial.

Authors:  Weikun Meng; Zhong Huang; Haoyang Wang; Duan Wang; Zeyu Luo; Yang Bai; Liang Gao; Guanglin Wang; Zongke Zhou
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.