Total hip arthroplasty: minimally invasive surgery or not? Meta-analysis of clinical trials
- 459 Downloads
There exist a relevant number of clinical trials comparing the minimally invasive surgery to the standard-invasive approach in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Up to date, there are still debates concerning the most effective approach in THA.
The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes concerning patients undergoing primary THA performed via the minimally invasive versus standard-invasive surgery incision.
Material and methods
The search was performed in the main databases, evaluating both quantitative and qualitative results. All the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials (nRCTs) comparing the minimally invasive versus the standard-invasive approach were enrolled in this study. We focused on the clinical and radiological outcomes and on the complication rate. Study methodological quality was assessed performing the PEDro critical appraisal scale. All meta-analyses were performed using the Review Manager software. To analyse the publication’s bias, we performed the Funnel plot.
We enrolled in our study 4761 patients, undergoing to 4842 total hip arthroplasties. The mean follow-up was 22.26 months. In favour of the minimally invasive group, we reported less total estimated blood loss, shorter surgical duration, and a shorter length of stay. In favour of the standard-invasive group, we reported a higher value of the Harris hip score. Concerning the radiological outcomes, we did not report substantial differences across the two exposures. No difference was observed regarding the risk of femoral fractures, dislocation, and revision rates. We evidenced an increasing risk occurred in an iatrogenic nerve palsy during the minimally invasive approach.
Based on currently available evidences concerning the outcomes following THA and the analysis of our results, we stated no remarkable benefits of the minimally invasive compared to the standard-invasive surgery.
KeywordsMinimally Mini Standard Exposure Invasive Approach Total hip arthroplasty Total hip replacement Hip prosthesis osteoarthritis
- 4.van Oldenrijk J, Scholtes VAB, van Beers L, Geerdink CH, Niers B, Runne W, Bhandari M, Poolman RW, Ctr c (2017) Better early functional outcome after short stem total hip arthroplasty? A prospective blinded randomised controlled multicentre trial comparing the Collum Femoris Preserving stem with a Zweymuller straight cementless stem total hip replacement for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip. BMJ Open 7(10):e014522. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014522 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 5.Higgins JPT, Green S (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. Available on www.handbook.cochrane.org Accessed on March 2018
- 6.OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group (2011) The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Available on https://www.cebm.net/2016/05/ocebm-levels-of-evidence/ Accessed on March 2018
- 14.Bennett D, Ogonda L, Elliott D, Humphreys L, Lawlor M, Beverland D (2007) Comparison of immediate postoperative walking ability in patients receiving minimally invasive and standard-incision hip arthroplasty: a prospective blinded study. J Arthroplast 22(4):490–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2006.02.173 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Biau DJ, Porcher R, Roren A, Babinet A, Rosencher N, Chevret S, Poiraudeau S, Anract P (2015) Neither pre-operative education or a minimally invasive procedure have any influence on the recovery time after total hip replacement. Int Orthop 39(8):1475–1481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2802-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Dienstknecht T, Luring C, Tingart M, Grifka J, Sendtner E (2014) Total hip arthroplasty through the mini-incision (micro-hip) approach versus the standard transgluteal (Bauer) approach: a prospective, randomised study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 22(2):168–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/230949901402200210 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Dorr LD, Maheshwari AV, Long WT, Wan Z, Sirianni LE (2007) Early pain relief and function after posterior minimally invasive and conventional total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized, blinded study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(6):1153–1160. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00940 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Farr D, Conn K, Britton J, Calder J, Stranks G (2009) Single incision posterior approach minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty is a safe, effective and reporducable technique in a district general hospital. A randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91(Supp III):405Google Scholar
- 25.Fink B, Mittelstaedt A, Schulz MS, Sebena P, Singer J (2010) Comparison of a minimally invasive posterior approach and the standard posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. A prospective and comparative study. J Orthop Surg Res 5:46. https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-5-46 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 33.Kubeš JLI, Podškubka A, Majernícek M, Vcelák J (2009) Total hip replacement from a MIS-AL approach (comparison with a standard anterolateral approach). Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cechoslov 76:288–294Google Scholar
- 35.Lawlor M, Humphreys P, Morrow E, Ogonda L, Bennett D, Elliott D, Beverland D (2005) Comparison of early postoperative functional levels following total hip replacement using minimally invasive versus standard incisions. A prospective randomized blinded trial. Clin Rehabil 19(5):465–474. https://doi.org/10.1191/0269215505cr890oa CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 40.Ogonda L, Wilson R, Archbold P, Lawlor M, Humphreys P, O'Brien S, Beverland D (2005) A minimal-incision technique in total hip arthroplasty does not improve early postoperative outcomes. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(4):701–710. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02645 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 53.Varela-Egocheaga JR, Suarez-Suarez MA, Fernandez-Villan M, Gonzalez-Sastre V, Varela-Gomez JR, Murcia-Mazon A (2013) Minimally invasive hip surgery: the approach did not make the difference. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 23(1):47–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-011-0917-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 58.Zawadsky MW, Paulus MC, Murray PJ, Johansen MA (2014) Early outcome comparison between the direct anterior approach and the mini-incision posterior approach for primary total hip arthroplasty: 150 consecutive cases. J Arthroplast 29(6):1256–1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.11.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 61.de Jong L, Klem T, Kuijper TM, Roukema GR (2018) The minimally invasive anterolateral approach versus the traditional anterolateral approach (Watson-Jones) for hip hemiarthroplasty after a femoral neck fracture: an analysis of clinical outcomes. Int Orthop 42(8):1943–1948. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3756-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 63.Yu YX, Yi CQ, Ma JZ, Wang QG (2016) Comparison of the effect of total hip arthroplasty through mini invasive direct anterior approach during learning curve period and posterolateral approach for the treatment of femoral head necrosis. Zhongguo Gu Shang 29(8):702–707. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-0034.2016.08.006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 65.Kawarai Y, Iida S, Nakamura J, Shinada Y, Suzuki C, Ohtori S (2017) Does the surgical approach influence the implant alignment in total hip arthroplasty? Comparative study between the direct anterior and the anterolateral approaches in the supine position. Int Orthop 41(12):2487–2493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3521-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 67.Woerner M, Sendtner E, Springorum R, Craiovan B, Worlicek M, Renkawitz T, Grifka J, Weber M (2016) Visual intraoperative estimation of cup and stem position is not reliable in minimally invasive hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 87(3):225–230. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2015.1137182 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 69.Martz P, Bourredjem A, Laroche D, Arcens M, Labattut L, Binquet C, Maillefert JF, Baulot E, Ornetti P (2017) Rottinger approach with dual-mobility cup to improve functional recovery in hip osteoarthritis patients: biomechanical and clinical follow-up. Int Orthop 41(3):461–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3245-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 70.Sariali E, Catonne Y, Pascal-Moussellard H (2017) Three-dimensional planning-guided total hip arthroplasty through a minimally invasive direct anterior approach. Clinical outcomes at five years’ follow-up. Int Orthop 41(4):699–705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3242-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar