Hemiarthroplasty through SuperPATH versus hemiarthroplasty through conventional approaches in patients with femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

The aim was to conduct a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short-term outcomes of bipolar hemiarthroplasty (HA) through SuperPATH and bipolar HA through conventional approaches (CAs) in patients with femoral neck fractures. The following PICO question was formulated: In human participants with femoral neck fractures, are the short-term outcomes of SuperPATH HA better than the short-term outcomes of CAs HA? The following databases were searched until 25 August 2023: PubMed, CNKI, CENTRAL of The Cochrane Library, Clinical trials, and Google Scholar. Quality assessment of the RCTs was performed, according to the Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tool and the recommendations of the GRADE system. Furthermore, we evaluated publication bias with funnel plots. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous variables using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method and a random effects model. Nine RCTs with overall 762 patients were included in this meta-analysis. All 9 RCTs were rated with a moderate risk of bias. The quality of evidence of the outcome parameters was rated moderate to very low. The funnel plots were overall broadly symmetrical, possibly indicating low to moderate publication bias. SuperPATH had a longer operation time compared to CAs (MD = 21.79, 95% CI 12.57 to 31.02). SuperPATH decreased incision length (MD = - 4.50; 95% CI - 5.80 to - 3.20), intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 103.96, 95% CI - 150.27 to - 55.66), postoperative drainage volume (MD = - 137.30, 95% CI - 178.74 to - 95.86), time to mobilization (MD = - 3.86; 95% CI - 5.96 to - 1.76), pain VAS ≤ 1 week postoperatively (MD = - 1.81; 95% CI - 2.17 to - 1.45), and hospitalization time (MD = - 4.05; 95% CI - 4.96 to - 3.15). SuperPATH improved HHS ≤ 1 week postoperatively (MD = 11.10; 95% CI 1.65 to 20.54) and HHS 3 months postoperatively (MD = 6.33; 95% CI 3.97 to 8.69). There was no difference in pain VAS 1-3 months postoperatively (MD = - 0.08; 95% CI - 0.22 to 0.05) and HHS 6 months postoperatively (MD = 0.44; 95% CI - 0.11 to 1.00). This is the first meta-analysis comparing SuperPATH HA with CAs HA in patients with femoral neck fractures. SuperPATH HA was superior in the early short-term functional outcome (HHS) compared to CAs HA, reaching minimal clinically important differences. Furthermore, SuperPATH HA showed significantly better results in incision length, blood loss, time to mobilization, pain intensity (VAS), and hospitalization time than CAs HA.

Risk Factors and Predictors for Functional Outcome and Complication Rate in Total Hip Arthroplasty through Minimally Invasive and Conventional Approaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of 41 Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate and identify risk factors and predictors for the difference in functional outcome and complications between total hip arthroplasty (THA) through minimally invasive and conventional approaches, using a meta-regression analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A systematic review of the literature up to 31 July 2022 was performed. A meta-regression was conducted based on a random effects meta-analysis using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method. RESULTS: A total of 41 RCTs with 3607 patients were found. The following predictors of HHS ≥ 6 months postoperatively were identified: patient age (predictor estimate = 0.14; p < 0.01), avascular necrosis of the femoral head (predictor estimate = -0.03; p = 0.04); incision length (predictor estimate = -0.82; p < 0.01). The following predictors of complication rate were identified: osteoarthritis (predictor estimate = 0.02; p = 0.02); femoral neck fracture (predictor estimate = -0.02; p = 0.02); SuperPATH (predictor estimate = -1.72; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patient age, avascular necrosis of the femoral head, and incision length were identified as predictors of the effect size of the HHS ≥ 6 months postoperatively; and osteoarthritis, femoral neck fracture, and SuperPATH as predictors of the effect size of the complication rate. Based on these findings, we recommend that more frequent use of minimally invasive THA in elderly patients should be considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: a systematic review of all relevant randomized controlled trials. Registered in PROSPERO on 10 August 2022 (CRD42022350287).

Cannulated screws versus dynamic hip screw versus hemiarthroplasty versus total hip arthroplasty in patients with displaced and non-displaced femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of 5703 patients.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to determine the best operative procedure in human participants with a displaced or non-displaced femoral neck fracture comparing cannulated screw (CS) fixation, dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation, hemiarthroplasty (HA), and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in terms of surgical and functional outcomes, reoperation and postoperative complications. METHODS: We searched PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Clinical trials, CINAHL, and Embase for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs up to 31 July 2022. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed to assess the comparative effects of the four operative procedures, using fixed-effects and random-effects models. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for continuous variables and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were estimated for binary variables. RESULTS: A total of 33 RCTs with 5703 patients were included in our network meta-analysis. CS fixation was best in terms of operation time (CS: MD = - 57.70, 95% CI - 72.78; - 42.62; DHS: MD = - 53.56, 95% CI - 76.17; - 30.95; HA: MD = - 20.90, 95% CI - 30.65; - 11.15; THA: MD = 1.00 reference) and intraoperative blood loss (CS: MD = - 3.67, 95% CI - 4.44; - 2.90; DHS: MD = - 3.20, 95% CI - 4.97; - 1.43; HA: MD = - 1.20, 95% CI - 1.73; - 0.67; THA: MD = 1.00 reference). In life quality and functional outcome, measured at different time points with EQ-5D and the Harris Hip Score (HHS), THA ranked first and HA second (e.g. EQ-5D 2 years postoperatively: CS: MD = - 0.20, 95% CI - 0.29; - 0.11; HA: MD = - 0.09, 95% CI - 0.17; - 0.02; THA: MD = 1.00 reference; HHS 2 years postoperatively: CS: MD = - 5.50, 95% CI - 9.98; - 1.03; DHS: MD = - 8.93, 95% CI - 15.08; - 2.78; HA: MD = - 3.65, 95% CI - 6.74; - 0.57; THA: MD = 1.00 reference). CS fixation had the highest reoperation risk, followed by DHS fixation, HA, and THA (CS: OR = 9.98, 95% CI 4.60; 21.63; DHS: OR = 5.07, 95% CI 2.15; 11.96; HA: OR = 1.60, 95% CI 0.89; 2.89; THA: OR = 1.00 reference). CONCLUSION: In our cohort of patients with displaced and non-displaced femoral neck fractures, HHS, EQ-5D, and reoperation risk showed an advantage of THA and HA compared with CS and DHS fixation. Based on these findings, we recommend that hip arthroplasty should be preferred and internal fixation of femoral neck fractures should only be considered in individual cases. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO on 10 August 2022 (CRD42022350293).

Direct and indirect comparisons in network meta-analysis of SuperPATH, direct anterior and posterior approaches in total hip arthroplasty.

SuperPATH is a novel approach to the hip joint that needs to be compared to other known surgical approaches. To conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short-term outcomes of SuperPATH, direct anterior (DAA), and posterior/ posterolateral approaches (PA) in total hip joint arthroplasty (THA). We performed a systematic review on PubMed, CNKI, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Clinical trials, and Google Scholar up to November 30th, 2021. We assessed treatment effects between SuperPATH, DAA, and PA by performing a frequentist NMA, including a total of 20 RCTs involving 1501 patients. SuperPATH showed a longer operation time (MD = 16.99, 95% CI 4.92 to 29.07), a shorter incision length (MD = -4.71, 95% CI -6.21 to -3.22), a lower intraoperative blood loss (MD = -81.75, 95% CI -114.78 to -48.72), a higher HHS 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively (MD = 2.59, 95% CI 0.59-4.6; MD = 2.14, 95% CI 0.5-3.77; MD = 0.6, 95% CI 0.03-1.17, respectively) than PA. DAA showed a higher intraoperative blood loss than PA and SuperPATH (MD = 91.87, 95% CI 27.99-155.74; MD = 173.62, 95% CI 101.71-245.53, respectively). No other relevant differences were found. In conclusion, the overall findings suggested that the short-term outcomes of THA through SuperPATH were statistically superior to PA. DAA and PA as well as SuperPATH and DAA showed indifferent results.

A meta-analysis on RCTs of direct anterior and conventional approaches in total hip arthroplasty.

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analyses on short-term outcomes between total hip arthroplasty (THA) through direct anterior approach (DAA) compared to THA through conventional approaches (CAs) in treatment of hip diseases and fractures. We performed a systematic literature search up to March 1, 2021 to identify RCTs, comparing THA through DAA with THA through CAs. We calculated mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous outcomes, using the DerSimonian and Laird method and a random effects model. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs for dichotomous outcomes, using the Mantel-Haenszel method and a random effects model. Ten RCTs met the criteria for final meta-analysis, involving 1053 patients. Four studies were blinded RCTs with a level I evidence, the other 6 studies were non-blinded RCTs with a level II evidence. DAA had a longer operation time than CAs (MD = 17.8, 95% CI 4.8 to 30.8); DAA had similar results compared to CAs for incision length (MD = - 1.1, 95% CI - 4.1 to 1.8), for intraoperative blood loss (MD = 67.2, 95% CI - 34.8 to 169.1), for HHS 3 months postoperatively (MD = 2.4, 95% CI - 0.7 to 5.5), for HHS 6 months postoperatively (MD = 0.8, 95% CI - 1.9 to 3.5), for HHS 12 months postoperatively (MD = 0.9, 95% CI - 0.7 to 2.5), for pain VAS 1 day postoperatively (MD = - 0.9, 95% CI - 2.0 to 0.15), for acetabular cup anteversion angle (MD = - 4.3, 95% CI - 5.2 to - 3.5), for acetabular cup inclination angle (MD = - 0.5, 95% CI - 2.1 to 1.1) and for postoperative complications (OR = 2.4, 95% CI 0.5 to 12.4). Considering the overall results of our meta-analysis, we can conclude that THA through DAA showed similar short-term surgical, functional, radiological outcomes and postoperative complications compared to THA through CAs.

Direct anterior approach vs. SuperPATH vs. conventional approaches in total hip replacement: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Two minimally invasive approaches showed some advantages in outcomes compared to conventional approaches (CAs) - the direct anterior approach (DAA) and the supercapsular percutaneously assisted approach in THA (SuperPATH). To the best of our knowledge, these three approaches have never been ranked in a network meta-analysis (NMA) before. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and NMA of randomized controlled trials comparing short-term outcomes of DAA, SuperPATH and CAs in total hip joint arthroplasty (THA), using CAs as common comparator. METHODS: A systematic literature search up to February 2021 was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DAA with CAs and SuperPATH with CAs in THA. We measured surgical, functional and radiological outcomes. A NMA, using frequentist methods was performed to assess treatment effects between DAA, SuperPATH and CAs. Information was borrowed from the above-mentioned RCTs, using the CA group as a common comparator. RESULTS: A total of 24 RCTs involving 2,074 patients met the inclusion criteria, six trials with a level I evidence, 18 trials with level II evidence. SuperPATH reduced operation time (fixed effects model: MD=8.1, 95% CI: 5.7 to 10.4), incision length (fixed effects model: MD=2.7, 95%CI: 2.5 to 2.9; random effects model: MD=4.1, 95%CI: 0.6 to 7.6), intraoperative blood loss (fixed effects model: MD=157, 95%CI: 139.2 to 174.2; random effects model: MD=129, 95%CI: 11.5 to 245.7) and early pain intensity (VAS 1 day postoperatively with a fixed effects model: MD=0.8, 95%CI: 0.4 to 1.2) compared to DAA. The two approaches did not differ in functional outcome and in acetabular cup inclination positioning. CONCLUSIONS: Our overall findings suggest that short-term outcomes of THA through SuperPATH were superior to DAA and CAs and that short-term outcomes of THA through DAA were superior to CAs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II; systematic review with level I studies and level II studies.

Direct anterior approach (DAA) vs. conventional approaches in total hip arthroplasty: A RCT meta-analysis with an overview of related meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVES: Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses on short-term outcomes between total hip arthroplasty (THA) through direct anterior approach (DAA) compared to THA through conventional (including anterior, anterolateral, lateral transgluteal, lateral transtrochanteric, posterior, and posterolateral) approaches (CAs) in treatment of hip diseases and fractures showed contradicting conclusions. Our aim was to draw definitive conclusions by conducting both a fixed and random model meta-analysis of quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and by comparison with related meta-analyses. DESIGN: We performed a systematic literature search up to May 2020 to identify RCTs, comparing THA through DAA with THA through CAs and related meta-analyses. We conducted risk of bias and level of evidence assessment in accordance with the Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tool and with the guidelines of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. We estimated mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) through fixed and random effects models, using the DerSimonian and Laird method. Heterogeneity was assessed using tau-square (τ2). Our conclusions take into account the overall results from related meta-analyses. RESULTS: Nine studies on THA through DAA met the criteria for final meta-analysis, involving 998 patients. Three studies were blinded RCTs with a level I evidence, the other 6 studies were non-blinded RCTs with a level II evidence. We came to the following results for THA through DAA compared to THA through CAs: operation time (I2 = 92%, p<0.01; fixed: MD = 15.1, 95% CI 13.1 to 17.1; random: MD = 18.1, 95% CI 8.6 to 27.5); incision length (I2 = 100%, p<0.01; fixed: MD = -2.9, 95% CI -3.0 to -2.8; MD = -1.1, 95% CI -4.3 to 2.0); intraoperative blood loss (I2 = 87%, p<0.01; fixed: MD = 51.5, 95% CI 34.1 to 68.8; random: MD = 51.9, 95% CI -89.8 to 193.5); VAS 1 day postoperatively (I2 = 79%, p = 0.03; fixed: MD = -0.8, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.4; random: MD = -0.9, 95% CI -2.0 to 0.15); HHS 3 months postoperatively (I2 = 52%, p = 0.08; fixed: MD = 2.8, 95% CI 1.1 to 4.6; random: MD = 3.0, 95% CI -0.5 to 6.5); HHS 6 months postoperatively (I2 = 0%, p = 0.67; fixed: MD = 0.9, 95% CI -1.1 to 2.9; random: MD = 0.9, 95% CI -1.1 to 2.9); HHS 12 months postoperatively (I2 = 0%, p = 0.79; fixed: MD = 0.7, 95% CI -0.9 to 2.4; random: MD = 0.7, 95% CI -0.9 to 2.4). We compared our findings with 7 related meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the results of our meta-analysis and the review of related meta-analyses, we can conclude that short-term outcomes of THA through DAA were overall better than THA through CAs. THA through DAA had a shorter incision length, a tendency towards a lower pain VAS 1 day postoperatively and better early postoperative functional outcome than THA through CAs. The intraoperative blood loss showed indifferent results. THA through DAA had a longer operation time than THA through CAs.

Comparison of short-term outcomes between direct anterior approach (DAA) and SuperPATH in total hip replacement: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Two minimally invasive approaches showed some advantages in outcomes compared to conventional approaches (CAs)-the direct anterior approach (DAA) and the supercapsular percutaneously assisted approach in THA (SuperPATH). To the best of our knowledge, DAA and SuperPATH have never been compared, neither in clinical studies, nor in a meta-analysis. To conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing short-term outcomes of DAA and SuperPATH in total hip joint arthroplasty (THA). METHODS: A systematic literature search up to May 2020 was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SuperPATH with CAs and DAA with CAs in THA. We measured surgical, functional, and radiological outcomes. A network meta-analysis, using frequentist methods, was performed to assess treatment effects between DAA and SuperPATH. Information was borrowed from the above-mentioned RCTs, using the CA group as a common comparator. RESULTS: A total of 16 RCTs involving 1392 patients met the inclusion criteria, three trials with a level I evidence, 13 trials with a level II evidence. The overall network meta-analysis showed that SuperPATH reduced operation time (fixed effect model: MD = 12.8, 95% CI 9.9 to 15.7), incision length (fixed effect model: MD = 4.3, 95% CI 4.0 to 4.5; random effect model: MD = 4.3, 95% CI 0.2 to 8.4), intraoperative blood loss (fixed effect model: MD = 58.6, 95% CI 40.4 to 76.8), and early pain intensity (VAS 1 day postoperatively with a fixed effect model: MD = 0.8, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.2). The two approaches did not differ in acetabular cup positioning angles and in functional outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Our overall findings suggested that the short-term outcomes of THA through SuperPATH were superior to DAA. SuperPATH showed better results in decreasing operation time, incision length, intraoperative blood loss, and early pain intensity. DAA and SuperPATH were equal in functional outcome and acetabular cup positioning.