Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Minimal-invasive Hüftendoprothetik – was muss geschont werden?

Minimally invasive hip arthroplasty – what must be spared?

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Orthopäde Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

Die klassischen operativen Zugangswege für den künstlichen Hüftgelenkersatz sind in den letzten Jahren zunehmend modifiziert worden. Die Entwicklung der minimal-invasiven Operationstechniken versprach eine weichteilschonende Präparation mit daraus resultierenden deutlichen Vorteilen für die postoperative Rekonvaleszenz und den intraoperativen Blutverlust. Exakte anatomische Kenntnisse der Hüftgelenkregion sind unabdingbare Voraussetzung zur Vermeidung von Komplikationen. Von den 5 am häufigsten gewählten Zugangswegen weist jeder ganz spezifische Vor- und Nachteile auf. Unter Berücksichtigung dieser Voraussetzungen kann die minimal-invasive Hüftchirurgie weichteilschonend durchgeführt werden. Die sich daraus ergebenden Vorteile für den Patienten bedürfen aber noch des signifikanten klinischen Nachweises.

Abstract

The classical surgical approach to the hip joint has been modified in recent years. The development of minimally invasive surgical techniques promised a particularly gentle soft-tissue preparation with significant benefits in postoperative recovery and intraoperative blood loss for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Exact knowledge of the anatomy of the hip joint and the surrounding structures at risk are essential to avoid complications. Each of the main minimally invasive approaches for THA implicates very specific advantages and disadvantages. Knowing these factors, minimally invasive hip surgery can be performed in a soft tissue-friendly manner. The resulting advantages have to be checked for significant clinical evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6
Abb. 7
Abb. 8
Abb. 9
Abb. 10

Literatur

  1. Berger RA (2004) Mini-incision total hip replacement using an anterolateral approach: technique and results. Orthop Clin North Am 35:143–151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Goldstein WM, Branson JJ (2004) Posterior-lateral approach to minimal incision total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 35:131–136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sculco TP (2004) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: in the affirmative. J Arthroplasty 19:78–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wohlrab D, Hagel A, Hein W (2004) Advantages of minimal invasive total hip replacement in the early phase of rehabilitation. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb142:685–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Woolson ST, Mow CS, Syquia JF et al (2004) Comparison of primary total hip replacements performed with a standard incision or a mini-incision. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 86-A:1353–1358

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rittmeister M, Peters A (2005) A posterior mini-incision for total hip arthroplasty – results of 76 consecutive cases. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 143:403–411

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Smith-Petersen MN (1949) Approach to and exposure of the hip joint for mold arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 31A:40–46

    Google Scholar 

  8. Watson-Jones R (1935) Fractures of the neck of the femur. Br J Surg 23:787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Higuchi F, Gotoh M, Yamaguchi N et al (2003) Minimally invasive uncemented total hip arthroplasty through an anterolateral approach with a shorter skin incision. J Orthop Sci 8:812–817

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wenz JF, Gurkan I, Jibodh SR (2002) Mini-incision total hip arthroplasty: a comparative assessment of perioperative outcomes. Orthopedics 25:1031–1043

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kennon RE, Keggi JM, Wetmore RS et al (2003) Total hip arthroplasty through a minimally invasive anterior surgical approach. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 85-A(Suppl 4):39–48

  12. Röttinger H (2006) The MIS anterolateral approach for THA. Orthopade 35:708, 710–708, 715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tillmann B (1979) Variations in the pathway of the inferior gluteal nerve (author’s transl). Anat Anz 145:293–302

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bauer R, Kerschbaumer F, Poisel S, Oberthaler W (1979) The transgluteal approach to the hip joint. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 95:47–49

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gibson A (1950) Posterior exposure of the hip joint. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 32-B:183–186

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hardinge K (1982) The direct lateral approach to the hip. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 64:17–19

    Google Scholar 

  17. Suh KT, Park BG, Choi YJ (2004) A posterior approach to primary total hip arthroplasty with soft tissue repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 418:162–167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. DiGioia AM III, Plakseychuk AY, Levison TJ, Jaramaz B (2003) Mini-incision technique for total hip arthroplasty with navigation. J Arthroplasty 18:123–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Moore AT (1957) The self-locking metal hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 39-A:811–827

    Google Scholar 

  20. Marcy GH, Fletcher RS (1954) Modification of the posterolateral approach to the hip for insertion of femoral-head prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 36-A:142–143

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ollier L (1891) Traité des résections et des opérations conservatrices: qu’on peut pratiquer sur le système osseux. Masson, Paris

  22. Ganz R, Klaue K, Vinh TS, Mast JW (1988) A new periacetabular osteotomy for the treatment of hip dysplasias. Technique and preliminary results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 232:26–36

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Rachbauer F (2005) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty via direct anterior approach. Orthopade 34:1103–1108, 1110

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Thomas W, Lucente L, Benecke P et al (2006) The medial approach for total hip replacement. Orthopade 35:769–775

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Berger RA (2003) Total hip arthroplasty using the minimally invasive two-incision approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res 417:232–241

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Von Lanz T, Wachsmuth W (1972) Praktische Anatomie. Bein und Statik. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  27. Tillmann BN (2010) Atlas der Anatomie. 2. Aufl. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopädische Klinik König-Ludwig-Haus, Lehrstuhl für Orthopädie der Universität Würzburg, Brettreichstr. 11, 97074, Würzburg, Deutschland

    M. Hoberg & M. Rudert

  2. Anatomisches Institut, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland

    B. Tillmann

Authors
  1. M. Hoberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Rudert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. Tillmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Hoberg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoberg, M., Rudert, M. & Tillmann, B. Minimal-invasive Hüftendoprothetik – was muss geschont werden?. Orthopäde 41, 338–345 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-011-1888-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-011-1888-1

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation