Enhanced recovery after posterior minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty with continuous intraarticular anaesthesia

Expert's Opinion • HIP - ARTHROPLASTY

Abstract

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the possible complications specific to the continuous intraarticular anaesthesia (CIA) in a minimally invasive posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty and its possible effects on the recovery, especially on pain and the length of hospitalisation.

Materials and methods

The surgical procedure is first precisely described step by step with numerous per-operating photographs. Particular technical points are detailed. The errors to be avoided are specified. A prospective series of 70 first-line total hip arthroplasties (one half with and one half without CIA) are analysed for the well-known results of total hip arthroplasty but specifically assessing: (a) specific possible complications to the minimally invasive posterior technique with the prolonged local anaesthesia and (b) effects on pain, duration of hospitalisation and satisfaction in patients (questionnaire).

Results

(a) Very low level of immediate post-operative pain was observed in almost all of the patients. (b) Patient satisfaction was high in our series. (c) A repeated education was provided multiple times to avoid specific complications following the absence of pain and consequent inattention.

Discussion and conclusion

The minimally invasive posterior approach with continuous intraarticular anaesthesia is an entirely reliable hip arthroplasty procedure. The patients exhibited a significantly less pain and a fast rate of recovery, but preparatory education must be even more significant.

Keywords

Hip Arthroplasty Fast-track recovery Intraarticular anesthesia 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The author has a contract as a medical advisor to FH Orthopedics, 68990 Heimsbrunn, France.

References

  1. 1.
    Wright JM, Crockett HC, Delgado S, Lyman S, Madsen M, Sculco TP (2004) Mini-incision for total hip arthroplasty: a prospective, controlled investigation with 5-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty 19:538–545CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wenz JF, Gurkan I, Jibodh SR (2002) Mini-incision total hip arthroplasty: a comparative assessment of perioperative outcomes. Orthopedics 25:1031–1043PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goldstein WM, Branson JJ, Berland KA, Gordon AC (2003) Minimal-incision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 85:33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berger R (2003) Total hip arthroplasty using the minimally invasive two-incision approach. Clin Orthop 417:232–241Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hartzband M (2004) Posterolateral minimal incision for total hip replacement: technique and early results. Orthop Clin North Am 35:119–129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Digioia AM, Plakseychuk AY, Levison TJ, Jaramaz B (2003) Mini-incision technique for total hip arthroplasty with navigation. J Arthroplasty 18:123–128CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Woolson ST, Mow CS, Syquia JF, Lannin JV, Schurman DJ (2004) Comparison of primary total hip replacements performed with a standard incision or a mini-incision. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 86:1353–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Howell JR, Masri BA, Duncan CP (2004) Minimally invasive versus standard incision anterolateral hip replacement: a comparative study. Orthop Clin North Am 35:153–162CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chiron P, Laffosse J, Fabié F, Puget J (2005) Prothèse totale de hanche. In: Puget J (ed) Les choix. Elsevier, Paris, pp 269–283Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chung WK, Liu D, Foo LS (2004) Mini-incision total hip replacement - Surgical technique and early results. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 12:19–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sculco TP (2004) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty in the affirmative. J Arthroplasty 19(4: suppl 1):78–80CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nakamura S, Matsuda K, Arai N, Wakimoto N, Matsushita T (2004) Mini-incision posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 28:214–217CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chimento G, Pavone V, Sharrock N, Kahn B, Cahill J, Sculco TP (2005) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. A prospective randomized study. J Arthroplasty 20:139–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ogonda L, Wilson R, Archbold P, Lawlor M, Humphreys P, O’brien S et al (2005) A minimal-incision technique in total hip arthroplasty does not improve early postoperative outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 87:701–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chiron P, Laffosse JM, Tricoire JL, Giordano G, Puget J (2006) Etude prospective et comparative entre la voie d’abord postérieure minimale invasive et la voie postérieure standard dans les prothèses totales de hanche. e-mémoires de l’Académie Nationale de. Chirurgie 5(3):06–16Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Goldstein WM, Branson JJ (2004) Posterior-lateral approach to minimal incision total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 35:131–136CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klein GR, Posner JM, Levine HB, Harzband MA (2017) Same day total hip arthroplasty performed at an ambulatory surgical center: 90-day complication rate on 549 patients. J Arthroplasty 32(4):1103–1106CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rasmussen S, Kramhøft MU, Sperling KP, Pedersen JHL (2004) Increased flexion and reduced hospital stay with continuous intraarticular morphine and ropivacaine after primary total knee replacement: open intervention study of efficacy and safety in 154 patients. Acta Orthop Scand 75(5):606–609CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Andersen KV, Pfeiffer-Jensen M, Haraldsted V, Søballe K (2007) Reduced hospital stay and narcotic consumption, and improved mobilization with local and intra-articular infiltration after hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial of an intra-articular technique versus epidural infusion in 80 patients. Acta Orthop 78(2):180–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Andersen LJ, Poulsen T, Krogh B, Nielsen T (2007) Postoperative analgesia in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized double-blinded, placebo-controlled study on peroperative and postoperative ropivacaine, ketorolac, and adrenaline wound infiltration. Acta Orthop 78(2):187–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kerr DR, Kohan L (2008) Local infiltration analgesia: a technique for the control of acute postoperative pain following knee and hip surgery: a case study of 325 patients. Acta Orthop 79(2):174–183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dobrydnjov I, Anderberg C, Olsson C, Shapurova O, Angel K, Bergman S (2011) Intraarticular vs. extraarticular ropivacaine infusion following high-dose local infiltration analgesia after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized double-blind study. Acta Orthop 82(6):692–698CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sun XL, Zhao ZH, Ma JX, Li FB, Li YJ, Meng XM, Ma XL (2015) Continuous local infiltration analgesia for pain control after total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 94(45):e2005CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Clinique des 3 frontièresSaint-LouisFrance

Personalised recommendations