Literature DB >> 27235516

A comparison between the direct anterior and posterior approaches for total hip arthroplasty: the role of an 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway.

I A Malek1, G Royce1, S U Bhatti1, J P Whittaker1, S P Phillips1, I R B Wilson1, J R Wootton1, I Starks1.   

Abstract

AIMS: We assessed the difference in hospital based and early clinical outcomes between the direct anterior approach and the posterior approach in patients who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The outcome was assessed in 448 (203 males, 245 females) consecutive patients undergoing unilateral primary THA after the implementation of an 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway. In all, 265 patients (mean age: 71 years (49 to 89); 117 males and 148 females) had surgery using the direct anterior approach (DAA) and 183 patients (mean age: 70 years (26 to 100); 86 males and 97 females) using a posterior approach. The groups were compared for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, the side of the operation, pre-operative Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and attendance at 'Joint school'. Mean follow-up was 18.1 months (one to 50).
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in mean length of stay (p = 0.07), pain scores on the day of surgery, the first, second and third post-operative days (p = 0.36, 0.23, 0.25 and 0.59, respectively), the day of mobilisation (p = 0.12), the mean OHS at six and 24 months (p = 0.08, and 0.29, respectively), the incidence of infection (p = 1.0), dislocation (p = 1.0), re-operation (p = 0.21) or 28 days' re-admission (p = 0.06). Significantly more patients in the DAA group achieved a planned discharge target of three days post-operatively (68% vs 56%, p = 0.007). The rate of periprosthetic femoral fractures was significantly higher in the DAA group (p = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: We conclude that there is no difference in clinical outcomes between the DAA and the posterior approach in patients undergoing THA when an 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway is used. However, a significantly higher rate of periprosthetic femoral fractures remains a concern with the DAA, even in experienced hands. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: Our results show that the DAA for THA is not superior to posterior approach when 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway is used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:754-60. ©2016 The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Direct Anterior approach; ERAS; Enhanced Recovery; Outcome; Posterior approach; Total hip replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27235516     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B6.36608

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  27 in total

1.  A useful technique for intraosseous sutures to promote early rehabilitation.

Authors:  R Singh; A Roberts
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  CORR Insights®: Do Postoperative Results Differ in a Randomized Trial Between a Direct Anterior and a Direct Lateral Approach in THA?

Authors:  Jacob M Drew
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  Enhanced recovery protocols in total joint arthroplasty: a review of the literature and their implementation.

Authors:  A S Galbraith; E McGloughlin; J Cashman
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 1.568

4.  Perioperative complications and causes of 30- and 90-day readmission after direct anterior approach primary total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Eric Sali; Jean-Luc Marmorat; Fabrice Gaudot; Christophe Nich
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2019-08-10

5.  Early experience with dual mobility acetabular systems featuring highly cross-linked polyethylene liners for primary hip arthroplasty in patients under fifty five years of age: an international multi-centre preliminary study.

Authors:  Jean-Alain Epinette; Steven F Harwin; Fiachra E Rowan; Philippe Tracol; Michael A Mont; Morad Chughtai; Geoffrey H Westrich
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-12-24       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 6.  Periprosthetic joint infection rates across primary total hip arthroplasty surgical approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 653,633 procedures.

Authors:  Alexander J Acuña; Michael T Do; Linsen T Samuel; Daniel Grits; Jesse E Otero; Atul F Kamath
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-09-30       Impact factor: 2.928

7.  Safely transitioning to the direct anterior from posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Takahito Yuasa; Katsuhiko Maezawa; Hironobu Sato; Yuichiro Maruyama; Kazuo Kaneko
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-03-23

8.  Routine postoperative blood tests in all patients undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty as part of an enhanced recovery pathway: Are they necessary?

Authors:  Vipul Garg; Iain Byrom; Neil Agnew; Ian Starks; Stephen Phillips; Ibrahim A Malek
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2021-01-17

9.  Anterior hip replacement: lower dislocation rates despite less restrictions?

Authors:  Anna Jungwirth-Weinberger; Tom Schmidt-Braekling; Kilian Rueckl; Bernhard Springer; Friedrich Boettner
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-03-09       Impact factor: 2.928

10.  Nerve palsy, dislocation and revision rate among the approaches for total hip arthroplasty: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  F Migliorini; A Trivellas; J Eschweiler; A Driessen; F Lessi; M Tingart; P Aretini
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2020-05-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.