Literature DB >> 17545416

Early pain relief and function after posterior minimally invasive and conventional total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized, blinded study.

Lawrence D Dorr1, Aditya V Maheshwari, William T Long, Zhinian Wan, Leigh Ellen Sirianni.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Few prospective randomized studies have demonstrated benefits of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty when compared with conventional total hip arthroplasty. We hypothesized that patients treated with a posterior mini-incision would have better results than those treated with a posterior long incision with regard to the achievement of established goals for pain relief and functional recovery permitting hospital discharge by the second postoperative day.
METHODS: Sixty of 231 eligible patients were randomized (with thirty in each group) to have a total hip arthroplasty performed through either a posterior mini-incision (10 +/- 2 cm) or a traditional long incision (20 +/- 2 cm). After completion of the total hip arthroplasty, the mini-incision group underwent extension of the skin incision to 20 cm. Patients were evaluated on the basis of self-determined pain scores, requirements for pain medicine, need for assistive gait devices, and time until discharge. Gait analysis provided objective functional assessment.
RESULTS: The average hospital stay was 63.2 +/- 13.3 hours in the mini-incision group and 73.6 +/- 23.5 hours in the long-incision group (p = 0.04). More patients with a mini-incision were discharged by the second postoperative day (p = 0.003) and more were using just a single assistive device at the time of discharge (p = 0.005). As scored on a verbal analog scale of 0 to 10 points, patients with a mini-incision had less pain on each postoperative day and the pain score remained significantly lower at the time of discharge (mean, 2.2 +/- 1.0 points compared with 3.1 +/- 0.9 points in the long-incision group; p = 0.002). After hospital discharge, there were no clinical differences in pain or function between the two groups of patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional total hip arthroplasty performed through a posterior incision, posterior minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty resulted in better early pain control, earlier discharge to home, and less use of assistive devices. Subsequent evaluations at six weeks and three months showed equivalency between the clinical results in the two groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17545416     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00940

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  72 in total

1.  Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty using a transpiriformis approach: a preliminary report.

Authors:  Douglas J Roger; David Hill
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01-04       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  What is the role of minimally invasive surgery in a fast track hip and knee replacement pathway?

Authors:  J M Lloyd; T Wainwright; R G Middleton
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 3.  Minimally invasive versus conventional exposure for total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes.

Authors:  Toby O Smith; Vicky Blake; Caroline B Hing
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-06-18       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  No strength or gait benefit of two-incision THA: a brief followup at 1 year.

Authors:  Aaron J Krych; Mark W Pagnano; Krista Coleman Wood; R Michael Meneghini; Kenton Kaufman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-11-13       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Surgical management of osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Katz; Brandon E Earp; Andreas H Gomoll
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.794

6.  Percutaneously assisted total hip (PATH) and Supercapsular percutaneously assisted total hip (SuperPATH) arthroplasty: learning curves and early outcomes.

Authors:  Kevin J Rasuli; Wade Gofton
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2015-08

7.  Early discharge and recovery with three minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty approaches: a preliminary study.

Authors:  R Michael Meneghini; Shelly A Smits
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-02-18       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Comment on: minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Nemandra Sandiford; Chindu Kabir; S K Muirhead-Allwood
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 9.  [Surgical approaches in hip resurfacing].

Authors:  L Gerdesmeyer; H Gollwitzer; R Bader; M Rudert
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.087

10.  Comparison of minimally invasive approach versus conventional anterolateral approach for total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  T Repantis; T Bouras; P Korovessis
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2014-02-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.