Hongmou Yuan1, Jiajun Zhu1, Zhenguo Sun1, Zhiyu Zhang2. 1. Department of Orthopedics, the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang Liaoning, 110032, P.R.China. 2. Department of Orthopedics, the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang Liaoning, 110032, P.R.China.2734891336@qq.com.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the effectiveness between SuperPATH approach and posterolateral approach in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods:Between January 2016 and December 2016, 84 patients with hip disease were included in the study and randomly divided into 2 groups. Forty patients were treated with THA via SuperPATH approach (SuperPATH group), and 44 patients were treated withTHA via posterolateral approach (PSA group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, body mass index, the type of disease, the complicating diseases, and preoperative thrombosis of lower extremity and Harris score between 2 groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of incision, postoperative drainage volume, unloaded activity time, Harris score, and short-form 36 health survey scale (SF-36) score were compared. The postoperative X-ray films were used to observe the position of joint prosthesis. Results: All patients were followed up 6-18 months (mean, 10.3 months). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of incision, postoperative drainage volume, and unloaded activity time in SuperPATH group were significantly superior to those in PSA group ( P<0.05). The Harris score at 2 weeks and 1 month after operation were significantly higher in SuperPATH group than that in PSA group ( P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in the Harris scores at 3 and 6 months after operation between 2 groups ( P>0.05). At last follow-up, the SF-36 scores were higher in SuperPATH group than those in PSA group ( P<0.05). Postoperative X-ray films showed the joint prosthesis was in good position. Conclusion: THA via SuperPATH approach has the advantages of minimal invasion, safe, and rapid recovery, which is better than THA via posterolateral approach.
RCT Entities:
Objective: To compare the effectiveness between SuperPATH approach and posterolateral approach in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: Between January 2016 and December 2016, 84 patients with hip disease were included in the study and randomly divided into 2 groups. Forty patients were treated with THA via SuperPATH approach (SuperPATH group), and 44 patients were treated with THA via posterolateral approach (PSA group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, body mass index, the type of disease, the complicating diseases, and preoperative thrombosis of lower extremity and Harris score between 2 groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of incision, postoperative drainage volume, unloaded activity time, Harris score, and short-form 36 health survey scale (SF-36) score were compared. The postoperative X-ray films were used to observe the position of joint prosthesis. Results: All patients were followed up 6-18 months (mean, 10.3 months). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, length of incision, postoperative drainage volume, and unloaded activity time in SuperPATH group were significantly superior to those in PSA group ( P<0.05). The Harris score at 2 weeks and 1 month after operation were significantly higher in SuperPATH group than that in PSA group ( P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in the Harris scores at 3 and 6 months after operation between 2 groups ( P>0.05). At last follow-up, the SF-36 scores were higher in SuperPATH group than those in PSA group ( P<0.05). Postoperative X-ray films showed the joint prosthesis was in good position. Conclusion: THA via SuperPATH approach has the advantages of minimal invasion, safe, and rapid recovery, which is better than THA via posterolateral approach.
Entities:
Keywords:
SuperPATH approach; Total hip arthroplasty; minimally invasive procedure; posterolateral approach
Authors: Nikolai Ramadanov; Simon Bueschges; Kuiliang Liu; Philip Lazaru; Ivan Marintschev Journal: J Orthop Surg Res Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 2.359