Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Total hip arthroplasty: minimally invasive surgery or not? Meta-analysis of clinical trials

  • Review Article
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

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.

Aim

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.

Result

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.

Conclusion

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.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ulucay C, Ozler T, Guven M, Akman B, Kocadal AO, Altintas F (2013) Etiology of coxarthrosis in patients with total hip replacement. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 47(5):330–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Higgins BT, Barlow DR, Heagerty NE, Lin TJ (2015) Anterior vs. posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty, a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplast 30(3):419–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.10.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Restrepo CPJ, Pour AE et al (2010) Prospective randomized study of two surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 25:671

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google 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

  7. Petis S, Howard JL, Lanting BL, Vasarhelyi EM (2015) Surgical approach in primary total hip arthroplasty: anatomy, technique and clinical outcomes. Can J Surg 58(2):128–139

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Meneghini RM, Hanssen AD (2009) Slower recovery after two-incision than mini-posterior-incision total hip arthroplasty. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(Suppl 2 Pt 1):50–73. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.01531

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Maher CGSC, Herbert RD, Moseley AM, Elkins M (2003) Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Phys Ther 83:713–721

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Smith TO, Blake V, Hing CB (2011) Minimally invasive versus conventional exposure for total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes. Int Orthop 35(2):173–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1075-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Berstock JR, Blom AW, Beswick AD (2014) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the standard versus mini-incision posterior approach to total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 29(10):1970–1982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.05.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Armijo-Olivo S, da Costa BR, Cummings GG, Ha C, Fuentes J, Saltaji H, Egger M (2015) PEDro or Cochrane to assess the quality of clinical trials? A meta-epidemiological study. PLoS One 10(7):e0132634. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132634

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Abdel MP, Chalmers BP, Trousdale RT, Hanssen AD, Pagnano MW (2017) Randomized clinical trial of 2-incision vs mini-posterior total hip arthroplasty: differences persist at 10 years. J Arthroplast 32(9):2744–2747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.04.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chen DW, Hu CC, Chang YH, Yang WE, Lee MS (2009) Comparison of clinical outcome in primary total hip arthroplasty by conventional anterolateral transgluteal or 2-incision approach. J Arthroplast 24(4):528–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2008.03.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chimento GF, Pavone V, Sharrock N, Kahn B, Cahill J, Sculco TP (2005) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. J Arthroplast 20(2):139–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chung WK, Liu D, Foo LS (2004) Mini-incision total hip replacement--surgical technique and early results. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 12(1):19–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/230949900401200105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Della Valle CJ, Dittle E, Moric M, Sporer SM, Buvanendran A (2010) A prospective randomized trial of mini-incision posterior and two-incision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(12):3348–3354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1491-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google 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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. DiGioia AM 3rd, Plakseychuk AY, Levison TJ, Jaramaz B (2003) Mini-incision technique for total hip arthroplasty with navigation. J Arthroplast 18(2):123–128. https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2003.50025

    Article  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dutka J, Sosin P, Libura M, Skowronek P (2007) Total hip arthroplasty through a minimally invasive lateral approach--our experience and early results. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil 9(1):39–45

    PubMed  Google 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):405

    Google 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

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Goosen JH, Kollen BJ, Castelein RM, Kuipers BM, Verheyen CC (2011) Minimally invasive versus classic procedures in total hip arthroplasty: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(1):200–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1331-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hart R, Stipcak V, Janecek M, Visna P (2005) Component position following total hip arthroplasty through a miniinvasive posterolateral approach. Acta Orthop Belg 71(1):60–64

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Howell JR, Masri BA, Duncan CP (2004) Minimally invasive versus standard incision anterolateral hip replacement: a comparative study. Orthop Clin North Am 35(2):153–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0030-5898(03)00137-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Khan RJMD, Hofmann M, Haebich S (2012) A comparison of a less invasive piriformis-sparing approach versus the standard posterior approach to the hip: a randomised controlled trial. J Bone J Surg Br 94(1):43–50

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Kim YH (2006) Comparison of primary total hip arthroplasties performed with a minimally invasive technique or a standard technique: a prospective and randomized study. J Arthroplast 21(8):1092–1098. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2006.01.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kiyama TNM, Shitama H, Shinoda T, Maeyama A (2008) Comparison of skin blood flow between mini- and standard-incision approaches during total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 23(7):1045–1049

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Krych AJ, Pagnano MW, Wood KC, Meneghini RM, Kaufmann K (2010) No benefit of the two-incision THA over mini-posterior THA: a pilot study of strength and gait. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(2):565–570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-0780-3

    Article  PubMed  Google 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 76:288–294

    Google Scholar 

  34. Laffosse JM, Chiron P, Tricoire JL, Giordano G, Molinier F, Puget J (2007) Prospective and comparative study of minimally invasive posterior approach versus standard posterior approach in total hip replacement. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 93(3):228–237

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Leuchte SLA, Wohlrad D (2007) Measurement of ground reaction forces after total hip arthroplasty using different surgical approaches. Z Orthop 145:74–80

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ilchmann T, Gersbach S, Zwicky L, Clauss M (2013) Standard transgluteal versus minimal invasive anterior approach in hip arthroplasty: a prospective, consecutive cohort study. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 5(4):e31. https://doi.org/10.4081/or.2013.e31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Martin R, Clayson PE, Troussel S, Fraser BP, Docquier PL (2011) Anterolateral minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled study with a follow-up of 1 year. J Arthroplast 26(8):1362–1372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2010.11.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Mazoochian F, Weber P, Schramm S, Utzschneider S, Fottner A, Jansson V (2009) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled prospective trial. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 129(12):1633–1639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-009-0870-4

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Pflüger GJ-JS, Schöll V (2007) Minimally invasive total hip replacement via the anterolateral approach in the supine position. Int Orthop 31(Suppl1):S7–S11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Pospischill M, Kranzl A, Attwenger B, Knahr K (2010) Minimally invasive compared with traditional transgluteal approach for total hip arthroplasty: a comparative gait analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(2):328–337. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.01086

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pour AE, Parvizi J, Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH (2007) Minimally invasive hip arthroplasty: what role does patient preconditioning play? J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(9):1920–1927. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.01153

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Rittmeister M, Peters A (2006) Comparison of total hip arthroplasty via a posterior mini-incision versus a classic anterolateral approach. Orthopade 35(7):716, 718–716, 722. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-006-0963-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Roy L, Laflamme GY, Carrier M, Kim PR, Leduc S (2010) A randomised clinical trial comparing minimally invasive surgery to conventional approach for endoprosthesis in elderly patients with hip fractures. Injury 41(4):365–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2009.10.002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Sculco TP, Jordan LC, Walter WL (2004) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: the Hospital for Special Surgery experience. Orthop Clin North Am 35(2):137–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0030-5898(03)00116-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sershon RA, Tetreault MW, Della Valle CJ (2017) A prospective randomized trial of mini-incision posterior and 2-incision total hip arthroplasty: minimum 5-year follow-up. J Arthroplast 32(8):2462–2465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2017.03.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Shitama T, Kiyama T, Naito M, Shiramizu K, Huang G (2009) Which is more invasive-mini versus standard incisions in total hip arthroplasty? Int Orthop 33(6):1543–1547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0708-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Speranza A, Iorio R, Ferretti M, D'Arrigo C, Ferretti A (2007) A lateral minimal-incision technique in total hip replacement: a prospective, randomizes, controlled trial. Hip Int 17(1):4–8

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Szendroi M, Sztrinkai G, Vass R, Kiss J (2006) The impact of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty on the standard procedure. Int Orthop 30(3):167–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-005-0049-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Taunton MJ, Mason JB, Odum SM, Springer BD (2014) Direct anterior total hip arthroplasty yields more rapid voluntary cessation of all walking aids: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. J Arthroplast 29(9 Suppl):169–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.03.051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Varela Egocheaga JR, Suarez-Suarez MA, Fernandez-Villan M, Gonzalez-Sastre V, Varela-Gomez J, Murcia-Mazon A (2010) Minimally invasive posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty. Prospective randomised trial. An Sist Sanit Navar 33(2):133–143

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Vicente JR, Croci AT, Camargo OP (2008) Blood loss in the minimally invasive posterior approach to total hip arthroplasty: a comparative study. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 63(3):351–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Wohlrab D, Hagel A, Hein W (2004) Advantages of minimal invasive total hip replacement in the early phase of rehabilitation. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 142(6):685–690. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-832447

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. 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 Arthroplast 19(5):538–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Yang CZQ, Han Y et al (2009) Minimally-invasive total hip arthroplasty will improve early postoperative outcomes: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Ir J Med Sci 179(2):285–289

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Zhang XL, Wang Q, Jiang Y, Zeng BF (2006) Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty with anterior incision. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 44(8):512–515

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Capuano N, Grillo G, Carbone F, Del Buono A (2018) Total hip arthroplasty performed with a tissue-preserving technique using superior capsulotomy. Int Orthop 42(2):281–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3722-9

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Paraskevopoulos A, Marenghi P, Alesci M, Pogliacomi F (2014) Mini-invasive anterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: short-term follow-up. Acta Biomed 85(Suppl 2):75–80

    PubMed  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Paillard P (2007) Hip replacement by a minimal anterior approach. Int Orthop 31(Suppl 1):S13–S15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-007-0433-7

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. von Rottkay E, Rackwitz L, Rudert M, Noth U, Reichert JC (2018) Function and activity after minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty compared to a healthy population. Int Orthop 42(2):297–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3541-z

    Article  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Apaydin N, Kendir S, Loukas M, Tubbs RS, Bozkurt M (2013) Surgical anatomy of the superior gluteal nerve and landmarks for its localization during minimally invasive approaches to the hip. Clin Anat 26(5):614–620. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.22057

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, Germany

    Filippo Migliorini, Björn Rath, Markus Tingart & Jörg Eschweiler

  2. Department of Information Engineering, University of Florence, via Santa Marta 3, Florence, Italy

    Massimiliano Biagini

  3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Eifelklinik St. Brigida, Simmerath, Kammerbruchstraße 8, Simmerath, Germany

    Nadine Meisen

Authors
  1. Filippo Migliorini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Massimiliano Biagini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Björn Rath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nadine Meisen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Markus Tingart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jörg Eschweiler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Filippo Migliorini.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Migliorini, F., Biagini, M., Rath, B. et al. Total hip arthroplasty: minimally invasive surgery or not? Meta-analysis of clinical trials. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 43, 1573–1582 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4124-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4124-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation