Abstract
The mini-incision posterior approach may appeal to surgeons comfortable with the standard posterior approach to the hip. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of these two approaches. Twelve randomised controlled trials and four non-randomised trials comprising of 1498 total hip arthroplasties were included. The mini-incision posterior approach was associated with an early improvement in Harris hip score of 1.8 points (P<0.001), reduced operating time (5minutes, P<0.001), length of hospital stay (14hours, P<0.001), intraoperative and total blood loss (63ml, P<0.001 and 119ml, P<0.001 respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of dislocation, nerve injury, infection or venous thromboembolic events. The minimally invasive posterior approach appears to provide a safe and acceptable alternative to the standard incision posterior approach.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1970-82 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Journal of Arthroplasty |
| Volume | 29 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2014 |
Research Groups and Themes
- Centre for Surgical Research
Keywords
- Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip
- Humans
- Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures
- Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
- Treatment Outcome
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'A systematic review and meta-analysis of the standard versus mini-incision posterior approach to total hip arthroplasty'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver