Literature DB >> 25795247

Comparative retrospective study of the direct anterior and transgluteal approaches for primary total hip arthroplasty.

Johannes C Reichert1, Maximilian R Volkmann2, Maximilian Koppmair2, Lars Rackwitz1, Martin Lüdemann2, Maximilian Rudert2, Ulrich Nöth3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The presented retrospective study compares clinical outcomes five years after total hip arthroplasty performed through a minimally invasive direct anterior approach and a direct transgluteal lateral approach.
METHODS: A total of 171 arthroplasties in 167 patients were evaluated utilizing the Harris hip score (HHS), the SF-36, a daily activity questionnaire, and the UCLA activity score.
RESULTS: The average HHS showed no significant difference equalling 91.4 points in the anterior group and 92.4 in the lateral group (p = 0.952). The SF-36 physical component scores were 50.7 (anterior) and 50.0 (lateral) while the psychometric properties added up to 48.6 (anterior) and 50.3 (lateral) with no significant differences evident (p = 0.782, p = 0.071). Daily activity was found to result in 4,855 (anterior) and 5,016 (lateral) cycles, respectively (p = 0.364). No difference regarding pain sensation was determined (p = 0.859). A significant difference was found for the UCLA score, which was calculated to be 5.9 in the anterior and 6.4 in the lateral approach group (p = 0.008).
CONCLUSION: In summary, our mid-term results show comparable outcomes for both approaches regarding functionality, pain, quality of life and daily activity.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Direct anterior approach; Mid-term; Outcome; Total hip arthroplasty; Transgluteal approach

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25795247     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-015-2732-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  22 in total

1.  Prospective randomized study of two surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Camilo Restrepo; Javad Parvizi; Aidin Eslam Pour; William J Hozack
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement. A standard system of terminology for reporting results.

Authors:  R C Johnston; R H Fitzgerald; W H Harris; R Poss; M E Müller; C B Sledge
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Anatomical course of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve and its susceptibility to compression and injury.

Authors:  O C Aszmann; E S Dellon; A L Dellon
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 4.730

4.  A minimally invasive approach for total hip arthroplasty does not diminish early post-operative outcome in obese patients: a prospective, randomised trial.

Authors:  Thomas Dienstknecht; Christian Lüring; Markus Tingart; Joachim Grifka; Ernst Sendtner
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Reduced postoperative pain in total hip arthroplasty after minimal-invasive anterior approach.

Authors:  Sascha Goebel; Andre F Steinert; Judith Schillinger; Jochen Eulert; Jens Broscheit; Maximilian Rudert; Ulrich Nöth
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-05-25       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  The transgluteal approach to the hip joint.

Authors:  R Bauer; F Kerschbaumer; S Poisel; W Oberthaler
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  1979-10

7.  The Daily Activity Questionnaire: a novel questionnaire to assess patient activity after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Nicole Wollmerstedt; Uli Nöth; Akif Ince; Hanns Ackermann; John M Martell; Christian Hendrich
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2009-02-20       Impact factor: 4.757

8.  Assessing activity in joint replacement patients.

Authors:  C A Zahiri; T P Schmalzried; E S Szuszczewicz; H C Amstutz
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  Which is the best activity rating scale for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty?

Authors:  Florian D Naal; Franco M Impellizzeri; Michael Leunig
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-06-28       Impact factor: 4.176

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

Authors:  Lawrence D Dorr; Aditya V Maheshwari; William T Long; Zhinian Wan; Leigh Ellen Sirianni
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  21 in total

1.  Long-term follow-up of primary total hip arthroplasty with the Alloclassic Variall system.

Authors:  Josef Hochreiter; Giovanni Brusaferri; Klaus Kirschbichler; Katja Emmanuel
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Three-dimensional in vivo difference between native acetabular version and acetabular component version influences iliopsoas impingement after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kwan Kyu Park; Tsung-Yuan Tsai; Dimitris Dimitriou; Young-Min Kwon
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-11-27       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Comparative outcomes between collared versus collarless and short versus long stem of direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and indirect meta-analysis.

Authors:  Phonthakorn Panichkul; Suthorn Bavonratanavech; Alisara Arirachakaran; Jatupon Kongtharvonskul
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-07-30

4.  In-hospital cost comparison between the standard lateral and supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip surgical techniques for total hip replacement.

Authors:  Wade Gofton; David A Fitch
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Function and activity after minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty compared to a healthy population.

Authors:  Eberhard von Rottkay; Lars Rackwitz; Maximilian Rudert; Ulrich Nöth; Johannes Christian Reichert
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Fluoroscopy assessment during anterior minimally invasive hip replacement is more accurate than with the posterior approach.

Authors:  Weifeng Ji; Nathaniel Stewart
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-05-10       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  No differences between direct anterior and lateral approach for primary total hip arthroplasty related to muscle damage or functional outcome.

Authors:  Belén De Anta-Díaz; Juan Serralta-Gomis; Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla; Eliana Benavidez; Fernando Anacleto López-Prats
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Röttinger approach with dual-mobility cup to improve functional recovery in hip osteoarthritis patients: biomechanical and clinical follow-up.

Authors:  Pierre Martz; Abderrahmane Bourredjem; Davy Laroche; Marc Arcens; Ludovic Labattut; Christine Binquet; Jean-Francis Maillefert; Emmanuel Baulot; Paul Ornetti
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 9.  Direct anterior total hip arthroplasty: Comparative outcomes and contemporary results.

Authors:  Keith P Connolly; Atul F Kamath
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2016-02-18

10.  Transitioning to the direct anterior approach in total hip arthroplasty. Is it a true muscle sparing approach when performed by a low volume hip replacement surgeon?

Authors:  Dan-Viorel Nistor; Sergiu Caterev; Sorana-Daniela Bolboacă; Dan Cosma; Dan Osvald Gheorghe Lucaciu; Adrian Todor
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.