Literature DB >> 22868598

Comparison of complications in single-incision minimally invasive THA and conventional THA.

Ning Li1, Yu Deng, Liaobin Chen.   

Abstract

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate whether single-incision minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty (THA) is superior to conventional incision THA by comparing postoperative complication rates, Harris Hip Scores, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores. Randomized, controlled trials comparing single-incision minimally invasive THA and conventional THA were reviewed. The methodological quality of each randomized, controlled trial was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale (Centre for Evidence-based Physiotherapy, The George Institute for Global Health, New South Wales, Australia). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to determine the quality of the evidence. Fourteen studies involving 1254 patients (1329 hips) were included in the meta-analysis, comprising 659 single-incision minimally invasive THAs (mean patient age, 63.9 years) and 670 conventional incision THAs (mean patient age, 65.0 years). A funnel plot of postoperative complication rates showed that a slight publication bias existed in the study. According to the meta-analysis, no significant statistical difference was observed in complication rates in no more than 3 postoperative years (odds ratio=1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 1.63; P=.79), in Harris Hip Scores in no more than 2 postoperative years (weighted mean difference=0.71; 95% confidence interval, -3.09 to 4.51; P=.71), and in WOMAC scores at 6 weeks postoperatively (weighted mean difference=-0.55; 95% confidence interval, -3.54 to 2.44; P=.72) between single-incision minimally invasive THA and conventional THA. Therefore, single-incision minimally invasive THA is not superior to conventional THA in early postoperative recovery, hip function, and complication rate. Copyright 2012, SLACK Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22868598     DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20120725-12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopedics        ISSN: 0147-7447            Impact factor:   1.390


  4 in total

1.  Is limited incision better than standard total hip arthroplasty? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joseph T Moskal; Susan G Capps
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-12-11       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Minimally Invasive Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Comparison of Restoring Hip Biomechanics With and Without a Traction Table.

Authors:  Florian Lenze; Florian Hinterwimmer; Lisa Fleckenstein; Igor Lazic; Dietmar Dammerer; Rüdiger VON Eisenhart-Rothe; Norbert Harrasser; Florian Pohlig
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  Comparison of short-term outcomes between SuperPATH approach and conventional approaches in hip replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Nikolai Ramadanov; Simon Bueschges; Kuiliang Liu; Roman Klein; Ruediger Schultka
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-17       Impact factor: 2.359

Review 4.  Mini-incision versus standard incision total hip arthroplasty regarding surgical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Chang-Peng Xu; Xue Li; Jin-Qi Song; Zhuang Cui; Bin Yu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.