Comparison of early functional recovery between direct anterior approach and posterolateral approach in the lateral decubitus position for total hip arthroplasty
Ji Wenhui, Shen Jirong, Yao Chen, Zhang Chao
The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Nanjing 210029, China
Abstract:Objective To compare the early clinical effect of posterolateral approach(PLA) and direct anterior approach(DAA) for total hip arthroplasty.Methods Retrospective cohort study was conducted. A total of 153 patients, including 64 males and 89 females, aged between 21 and 81 years old, who were treated with total hip replacement in the Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Traditional Chinese Medicine from April 2017 to June 2018. They were divided into the DAA group (79 cases) and the PLA group (74 cases) according to different surgical approaches. The operative time, incision length, visual analog score(VAS), Harris score, postoperative hospitalization time, independent walking time without walker and complications rate were compared and analyzed between the two groups. On the first postoperative day,the pelvic anterior radiograph was taken, and the PACS image processing system was used to measure the prosthetic angle . Then the position of the femoral prosthesis was determined according to the Nakata method ( the femoral false body curl over 3°- 3° for fixed prosthesis was centricity fixed).and the acetabular abduction angle and anteversion angle were measured according to the Pradhan method ( the acetabulum abduction angle of 30°-50°, the anteversion angle of 5°- 25°, which was the safe range of acetabular prostheses).Results Compared with the PLA group, the DAA group had longer operative time [(68.61±7.15)min vs (63.45±8.82)min], shorter incision length[(10.47±0.88)cm vs (12.06±0.91)cm], less intraoperative blood loss [(131.40±42.83)mL vs (155.70±48.09)mL], and shorter postoperative hospital stay[(3.94±0.92)d vs (4.79±0.95)d].The walking time away from the walker was shorter[(3.91±1.09)d vs (6.34±1.35)d], and the postoperative VAS was lower at 1st and 3rd day after surgery(4.05±0.70 vs 4.38±0.75, 2.47±0.80 vs 2.82±0.88). The Harris scores were higher in the first and third month after operation (82.46±3.82 and 77.59±4.78, 89.11±3.61 and 85.82±3.18), and the differences were statistically significant (all P values<0.05). The acetabulum abducent angle and anteversion angle of DAA group was 44.11°±4.61° and 18.57°±3.81 ° . The angle of PLA group was 44.11°±4.61° and 18.57°±3.81°. In the DAA group, the ratio of the acetabular cup located in a safe area was 94.9%(75/79), while in the PLA group, the ratio was 93.2% (69/74). The median rate of femoral prosthesis was 93.6% (74/79) in the DAA group and 97.2% (72/74) in the PLA group. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups (all P values>0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P>0.05).Conclusions Compared with the PLA, the DAA with lateral decubitus is a safe and effective minimally invasive approach with less trauma, less postoperative pain and faster recovery .
季文辉, 沈计荣, 姚晨, 张超. 侧卧位直接前入路与后外侧入路全髋关节置换术早期临床疗效的比较[J]. 中华解剖与临床杂志, 2019, 24(4): 390-395.
Ji Wenhui, Shen Jirong, Yao Chen, Zhang Chao. Comparison of early functional recovery between direct anterior approach and posterolateral approach in the lateral decubitus position for total hip arthroplasty. Chinese Journal of Anatomy and Clinics, 2019, 24(4): 390-395.
Fehring TK, Odum SM, Troyer JL, et al. Joint replacement access in 2016[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2010, 25(8): 1175-1181. DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2010.07.025.
[2]
Wilson NA, Schneller ES, Montgomery K, et al. Hip and knee implants: current trends and policy considerations[J]. Health Aff (Millwood), 2008, 27(6): 1587-1598. DOI:10.1377/hlthaff.27.6.1587.
[3]
Post ZD, Orozco F, Diaz-Ledezma C, et al. Direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: indications, technique, and results[J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2014, 22(9): 595-603. DOI:10.5435/JAAOS-22-09-595.
[4]
Parvizi J, Restrepo C, Maltenfort MG. Total hip arthroplasty performed through direct anterior approach provides superior early outcome: results of a randomized, prospective study[J]. Orthop Clin North Am, 2016, 47(3): 497-504. DOI:10.1016/j.ocl.2016.03.003.
[5]
Mjaaland KE, Kivle K, Svenningsen S, et al. Comparison of markers for muscle damage, inflammation, and pain using minimally invasive direct anterior versus direct lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial[J]. J Orthop Res, 2015, 33(9): 1305-1310. DOI:10.1002/jor.22911.
[6]
Hartog YM, Vehmeijer SB. High complication rate in the early experience of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty by the direct anterior approach[J]. Acta Orthop, 2013, 84(1): 116-117. DOI:10.3109/17453674.2013.773412.
[7]
Taunton MJ, Trousdale RT, Sierra RJ, et al. John charnley award: randomized clinical trial of direct anterior and miniposterior approach THA: which provides better functional recovery?[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2018, 476(2): 216-229. DOI:10.1007/s11999.0000000000000112.
[8]
Poehling-Monaghan KL, Kamath AF, Taunton MJ, et al. Direct anterior versus miniposterior THA with the same advanced perioperative protocols: surprising early clinical results[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2015, 473(2): 623-631. DOI:10.1007/s11999-014-3827-z.
[9]
Nakata K, Nishikawa M, Yamamoto K, et al. A clinical comparative study of the direct anterior with mini-posterior approach: two consecutive series[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2009, 24(5): 698-704. DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2008.04.012.
[10]
Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, et al. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1978, 60(2): 217-220. DOI:10.2106/00004623-197860020-00014.
[11]
Pradhan R. Planar anteversion of the acetabular cup as determined from plain anteroposterior radiographs[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1999, 81(3): 431-435.
[12]
Mahmood SS, Mukka SS, Crnalic S, et al. The influence of leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty on function and quality of life: a prospective cohort study[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2015, 30(9): 1638-1642. DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2015.04.012.
[13]
Bremer AK, Kalberer F, Pfirrmann CW, et al. Soft-tissue changes in hip abductor muscles and tendons after total hip replacement: comparison between the direct anterior and the transgluteal approaches[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2011, 93(7): 886-889. DOI:10.1302/0301-620X.93B7.25058.
[14]
Harrison CL, Thomson AI, Cutts S, et al. Research synthesis of recommended acetabular cup orientations for total hip arthroplasty[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2014, 29(2): 377-382. DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2013.06.026.
[15]
Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty Collaborative Investigators, Bhandari M, Matta JM, et al. Outcomes following the single-incision anterior approach to total hip arthroplasty: a multicenter observational study[J]. Orthop Clin North Am, 2009, 40(3): 329-342. DOI:10.1016/j.ocl.2009.03.001.
[16]
de Steiger RN, Lorimer M, Solomon M. What is the learning curve for the anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty?[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2015, 473(12): 3860-3866. DOI:10.1007/s11999-015-4565-6.