Cargando…

Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: There are several approaches to THA, and each has their respective advantages and disadvantages. Previous meta-analysis included non-randomised studies that introduce further heterogeneity and bias to the evidence presented. This meta-analysis aims to present level I evidence by comparin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ang, James Jia Ming, Onggo, James Randolph, Stokes, Christopher Michael, Ambikaipalan, Anuruban
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Paris 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10504117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37010580
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00590-023-03528-8
_version_ 1785106658394898432
author Ang, James Jia Ming
Onggo, James Randolph
Stokes, Christopher Michael
Ambikaipalan, Anuruban
author_facet Ang, James Jia Ming
Onggo, James Randolph
Stokes, Christopher Michael
Ambikaipalan, Anuruban
author_sort Ang, James Jia Ming
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There are several approaches to THA, and each has their respective advantages and disadvantages. Previous meta-analysis included non-randomised studies that introduce further heterogeneity and bias to the evidence presented. This meta-analysis aims to present level I evidence by comparing functional outcomes, peri-operative parameters and complications of direct anterior approach (DAA) versus posterior approach (PA) or lateral approach (LA) in THA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A comprehensive multi-database search (PubMed, OVID Medline, EMBASE) was conducted from date of database inception to 1st December 2020. Data from randomised controlled trials comparing outcomes of DAA versus PA or LA in THA were extracted and analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies comprising 2010 patients were included in this meta-analysis. DAA has a longer operative time (MD = 17.38 min, 95%CI: 12.28, 22.47 min, P < 0.001) but a shorter length of stay compared to PA (MD = − 0.33 days, 95%CI: − 0.55, − 0.11 days, P = 0.003). There was no difference in operative time or length of stay when comparing DAA versus LA. DAA also had significantly better HHS than PA at 6 weeks (MD = 8.00, 95%CI: 5.85, 10.15, P < 0.001) and LA at 12 weeks (MD = 2.23, 95%CI: 0.31, 4.15, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in risk of neurapraxia for DAA versus LA or in risk of dislocations, periprosthetic fractures or VTE between DAA and PA or DAA and LA. CONCLUSION: The DAA has better early functional outcomes with shorter mean length of stay but was associated with a longer operative time than PA. There was no difference in risk of dislocations, neurapraxias, periprosthetic fractures or VTE between approaches. Based on our results, choice of THA approach should ultimately be guided by surgeon experience, surgeon preference and patient factors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10504117
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Paris
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105041172023-09-17 Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis Ang, James Jia Ming Onggo, James Randolph Stokes, Christopher Michael Ambikaipalan, Anuruban Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol General Review BACKGROUND: There are several approaches to THA, and each has their respective advantages and disadvantages. Previous meta-analysis included non-randomised studies that introduce further heterogeneity and bias to the evidence presented. This meta-analysis aims to present level I evidence by comparing functional outcomes, peri-operative parameters and complications of direct anterior approach (DAA) versus posterior approach (PA) or lateral approach (LA) in THA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A comprehensive multi-database search (PubMed, OVID Medline, EMBASE) was conducted from date of database inception to 1st December 2020. Data from randomised controlled trials comparing outcomes of DAA versus PA or LA in THA were extracted and analysed. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies comprising 2010 patients were included in this meta-analysis. DAA has a longer operative time (MD = 17.38 min, 95%CI: 12.28, 22.47 min, P < 0.001) but a shorter length of stay compared to PA (MD = − 0.33 days, 95%CI: − 0.55, − 0.11 days, P = 0.003). There was no difference in operative time or length of stay when comparing DAA versus LA. DAA also had significantly better HHS than PA at 6 weeks (MD = 8.00, 95%CI: 5.85, 10.15, P < 0.001) and LA at 12 weeks (MD = 2.23, 95%CI: 0.31, 4.15, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in risk of neurapraxia for DAA versus LA or in risk of dislocations, periprosthetic fractures or VTE between DAA and PA or DAA and LA. CONCLUSION: The DAA has better early functional outcomes with shorter mean length of stay but was associated with a longer operative time than PA. There was no difference in risk of dislocations, neurapraxias, periprosthetic fractures or VTE between approaches. Based on our results, choice of THA approach should ultimately be guided by surgeon experience, surgeon preference and patient factors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Springer Paris 2023-04-03 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10504117/ /pubmed/37010580 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00590-023-03528-8 Text en © Crown 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle General Review
Ang, James Jia Ming
Onggo, James Randolph
Stokes, Christopher Michael
Ambikaipalan, Anuruban
Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic General Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10504117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37010580
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00590-023-03528-8
work_keys_str_mv AT angjamesjiaming comparingdirectanteriorapproachversusposteriorapproachorlateralapproachintotalhiparthroplastyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT onggojamesrandolph comparingdirectanteriorapproachversusposteriorapproachorlateralapproachintotalhiparthroplastyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT stokeschristophermichael comparingdirectanteriorapproachversusposteriorapproachorlateralapproachintotalhiparthroplastyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT ambikaipalananuruban comparingdirectanteriorapproachversusposteriorapproachorlateralapproachintotalhiparthroplastyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis