Literature DB >> 21161743

Direct anterior approach for hip resurfacing: surgical technique and complications.

Stefan Kreuzer1, Kevin Leffers, Suneel Kumar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The direct anterior approach (DAA) for hip resurfacing arthroplasty is a technically difficult approach but theoretically reduces the soft tissue trauma to the hip because it does not require muscle detachments from the bone. Furthermore, the patient is in the supine position facilitating fluoroscopy to control component placement. However, the complications associated with the learning curve and functional outcome scores are not well defined in the literature. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked how our first 57 operations using the anterior approach and special table extension compared with that in the literature with regard to (1) complication rate; (2) functional outcome scores; (3) component placement; and (4) length of stay.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 51 patients who underwent 57 hip resurfacing procedures using a DAA. There were 45 men and six women with an average age of 51 years (range, 31-63 years) and a body mass index of 28.7 kg/m(2) (range, 19.7-42.0 kg/m(2)). The minimum followup was 0.3 months (mean, 8.7 months; range, 0.3-24.9 months).
RESULTS: There were three atraumatic (5%) and one posttraumatic (1.8%) femoral neck fractures. Average HOOS scores were equal to or better than averages reported for total hip arthroplasty. Average cup inclination was 36.5° (range, 25°-48°). The average length of stay was 2.11 days (range, 1-4 days).
CONCLUSIONS: The surgical approach for anterior hip resurfacing is technically difficult but may have some clinical benefits. Surgeons interested in using the DAA for hip resurfacing should be very familiar with the DAA for total hip arthroplasty and with hip resurfacing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21161743      PMCID: PMC3094629          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1698-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  21 in total

Review 1.  Surgical approach, abductor function, and total hip arthroplasty dislocation.

Authors:  John L Masonis; Robert B Bourne
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Risk factors affecting outcome of metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty of the hip.

Authors:  Paul E Beaulé; Frederick J Dorey; Michel J Le Duff; Michel LeDuff; Thomas Gruen; Harlan C Amstutz
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  A modified posterior approach preserves femoral head oxgenation during hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Robert-Tobias Steffen; Koen A De Smet; David W Murray; Harinderjit Singh Gill
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years.

Authors:  R B C Treacy; C W McBryde; P B Pynsent
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2005-02

Review 5.  Vascularity of the arthritic femoral head and hip resurfacing.

Authors:  Paul E Beaulé; Pat Campbell; Zhen Lu; Katharina Leunig-Ganz; Martin Beck; Michael Leunig; Reinhold Ganz
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: a national review of 50 cases.

Authors:  A J Shimmin; D Back
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2005-04

7.  Single-incision anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty on an orthopaedic table.

Authors:  Joel M Matta; Cambize Shahrdar; Tania Ferguson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Muscle damage during MIS total hip arthroplasty: Smith-Petersen versus posterior approach.

Authors:  R Michael Meneghini; Mark W Pagnano; Robert T Trousdale; William J Hozack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 9.  Anterolateral mini-incision hip replacement surgery: a modified Watson-Jones approach.

Authors:  Kim C Bertin; Heinz Röttinger
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Harlan C Amstutz; Paul E Beaulé; Frederick J Dorey; Michel J Le Duff; Pat A Campbell; Thomas A Gruen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  5 in total

1.  The direct anterior approach in hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures.

Authors:  Kerstin Schneider; Laurent Audigé; Stefanie-Peggy Kuehnel; Naeder Helmy
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-04-13       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  SuperPath® vs. direct anterior approach : A retrospective comparison between two minimally invasive approaches in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  André Busch; Alexander Wegner; Dennis Wassenaar; Daniel Brandenburger; Marcel Haversath; Marcus Jäger
Journal:  Orthopadie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-10-07

3.  Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcome from Neck-Preserving, Short-Stem Arthroplasty and Resurfacing Arthroplasty in Younger Osteoarthritis Patients.

Authors:  Marius Dettmer; Amir Pourmoghaddam; Stefan W Kreuzer
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2015-05-26

4.  Osseointegrated total hip replacement connected to a lower limb prosthesis: a proof-of-concept study with three cases.

Authors:  Aditya Khemka; Chalak I FarajAllah; Sarah J Lord; Belinda Bosley; Munjed Al Muderis
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 2.359

5.  Total hip arthroplasty through an anterior approach: The pros and cons.

Authors:  Georgios Kyriakopoulos; Lazaros Poultsides; Panayiotis Christofilopoulos
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2018-11-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.