RESUMO
Purpose: The direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip replacement (THR) is relatively new. It has been proved superior to other techniques concerning early functional outcomes, stability, and earlier recovery. But DAA-THR has a steeper surgical learning curve and, in its original description, needs special operating room equipment. This study aims to present clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes of DAA compared to the posterior approach (PA), performed using a routine operating table and instrumentation sets. Methods: Eighty patients undergoing THR were non-randomly allocated prospectively into Group 1 DAA and Group 2 PA. Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain was recorded preoperatively and at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 h after the surgery and at 1st and 2nd year postoperatively. Both groups' functional outcomes were evaluated pre-and postoperatively at 1st and 2nd-year follow-up with Harris hip score (HHS) and SF-12. Perioperative parameters like blood loss, length of hospital stay, duration of surgery, postoperative complications, and radiological prosthesis positioning were also compared between the two groups. Results: All patients were comparable according to their baseline demographic characteristics. DAA was found to have significantly better early HHS at one year (p = 0.001) and VAS for hip pain (p < 0.05) at 12, 24, 48, and 72 hrs postoperative period only. Clinical outcomes were comparable at the final follow-up of 2 years. Perioperative variables were also similar except the incision length, length of stay in the hospital, and average time to weight bear without walking aids which were statistically better in DAA than PA group. There was no difference in radiological prosthesis positioning. Postoperative complication rates were also comparable in the two groups. Conclusion: Though technically demanding, DAA provides better early functional outcomes with comparable radiological outcomes and complication rates than the PA.Level of evidence: Non-randomized comparative trial, Level II.
RESUMO
There are three traditional surgical approaches to hemiarthroplasty (HA) for femoral neck fractures, respectively, the anterior approach (AA), the lateral approach (LA) and the posterior approach (PA). However, the optimum approach is still controversial, the purpose of this meta-analysis is to identify the merits and demerits of all three approaches. All clinical published studies in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from January 2000 to April 2022 were searched which compared different surgical approaches and covered surgery-related outcomes and frequent complications. Five randomized controlled trials and 26 cohort studies for a total of 31 clinical trials were included in the meta-analysis. The dislocation of PA was significantly higher than LA (OR: 3.00 95% CI: 2.25-4.01 I 2 = 27% P < 0.00001) and AA (OR: 6.61 95% CI: 2.28-19.13 I 2 = 0% P = 0.0005); PA was substantially more than LA in terms of risk of postoperative reoperation (P < 0.05); meanwhile, AA has markedly shorter hospital length of stays than LA. The remaining items showed no significant differences in the results.The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated that the risk of PA dislocation and reoperation is higher with hemiarthroplasty, and AA has markedly shorter hospital length of stays than LA.