CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Minimally invasive total hip replacement via the anterolateral approach in the supine position.

Total hip arthroplasty through minimally invasive procedures potentially reduces operative trauma, which is expected to result in improved recovery and rehabilitation. We presently perform total hip arthroplasty using minimally invasive techniques via an anterolateral modification of the Watson-Jones approach. This approach is performed in the supine position and requires sterile draping of both legs. It also involves a modified operative technique which preserves the pelvitrochanteric muscles and extends the release of the hip capsule. In order to employ a proven implant system (BICON-PLUS threaded cup, SL-PLUS stem), it was necessary to modify the stem rasps and use manipulation rasps as trial stems. In this report, we compare 50 conventional total hip replacements with 50 procedures performed using the minimally invasive procedure in terms of blood loss and the duration of the operation. The length of the skin incision varied between 7 and 12 cm with the minimally invasive technique, compared to 15 to 22 cm with the conventional procedure. Both groups were virtually identical with respect to average blood loss (haemoglobin on 10th post-operative day: minimally invasive group, 108.0 g/L; conventional group, 112.0 g/L) and the duration of the procedure (minimally invasive group, 60 minutes; conventional group, 58 minutes). The position of the implanted components correlated with the pre-operative planning with regard to medial head offset, centre of rotation of the hip, and leg length, and was as satisfactory as that observed with the conventional procedure. The complication rate was low (2.9%). Shaft fissures occurred in the first months of use of the minimally invasive procedure before adaptation of the shaft rasps. Dislocations were attributable to improper patient behaviour. Minimally invasive surgery via the anterolateral approach in the supine position was equivalent to the conventional procedure, had a low rate of complications, and did not adversely impact the technical success of the procedure.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app