Comparison of mini-incision total hip arthroplasty through an anterior approach and a posterior approach using navigation.

This study reports on differences in the use of minimally invasive surgery for total hip arthroplasty related to the direction of cup insertion against the operating table, intraoperative hip range of motion, stability, and a choice of cup liners for both a mini-incision posterior approach (MPA) and a mini-incision anterior approach (MAA) using Stryker Navigation's CT-Hip system. The MPA group consisted of 39 consecutive patients and the MAA group consisted of 33 consecutive patients. Clinically, there was no significant difference in the average Japanese Orthopedic Association hip score or the Oxford hip score preoperatively and at 6 months and 2 years follow-up. The intraoperative joint stability measurements showed no large difference between the two groups when malpositioning of the cup was eliminated.

[1]  J J Callaghan,et al.  The uncemented porous-coated anatomic total hip prosthesis. Two-year results of a prospective consecutive series. , 1988, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[2]  B. Zurfluh,et al.  Compliant positioning of total hip components for optimal range of motion , 2004, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[3]  T Nishii,et al.  Mid-term results of cementless total hip replacement using a ceramic-on-ceramic bearing with and without computer navigation. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[4]  Branislav Jaramaz,et al.  Mini-incision technique for total hip arthroplasty with navigation. , 2003, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[5]  J. Lewis,et al.  Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. , 1978, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  Hideki Yoshikawa,et al.  Comparison of navigation accuracy in THA between the mini‐anterior and ‐posterior approaches , 2009, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[7]  Martin Thaler,et al.  Reduced variability in cup positioning: the direct anterior surgical approach using navigation , 2008, Acta orthopaedica.

[8]  T. Sculco,et al.  Mini-incision for total hip arthroplasty: a prospective, controlled investigation with 5-year follow-up evaluation. , 2004, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[9]  D. Murray.  The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[10]  T. Light,et al.  Anterior approach to hip arthroplasty. , 1980, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[11]  L. Dorr,et al.  Operative and Patient Care Techniques for Posterior Mini-incision Total Hip Arthroplasty , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[12]  Richard A Berger,et al.  Total Hip Arthroplasty Using the Minimally Invasive Two-Incision Approach , 2003, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  N. Sugano,et al.  Validity and responsiveness of the Oxford hip score in a prospective study with Japanese total hip arthroplasty patients , 2009, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

[14]  B Jaramaz,et al.  Image Guided Navigation System to Measure Intraoperatively Acetabular Implant Alignment , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  J. Matta,et al.  Single-incision Anterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty on an Orthopaedic Table , 2005, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  C. Engh,et al.  The case for porous-coated hip implants. The femoral side. , 1990, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.