A new minimal-invasive approach for total hip replacement in sheep.

BACKGROUND Over the last 50 years arthroplasty became the gold-standard treatment for disabling conditions of the coxofemoral joint. Variations of anterior, lateral, and dorsal incision have been applied, but as each approach requires the incision and reflection of various muscles to gain adequate exposure of the joint results are still controversial. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to develop a minimal-invasive, tissue-sparing approach in sheep with reduced risks in animal testing. METHODS 12 mature sheep underwent hip surgery as part of a study to evaluate a hip resurfacing system. In line with the preliminary cadaveric tests a modified, minimal-invasive, musclepreserving surgical approach was sought after. RESULTS We developed a surgical approach to the coxofemoral joint in sheep using only blunt tissue dissection after skin incision without any limitations in joint exposure or increased blood loss/duration of surgery. CONCLUSION Even though limitations occur and femoral orientation in sheep differs from man, joint forces have similar relative directions to the bone with similar bony and vascular anatomy. Therefore, this minimal-invasive muscle preserving approach might be a safe and comparable alternative in still inevitable animal testing.

[1]  R. Schwarzkopf,et al.  The direct anterior approach to the hip: a useful tool in experienced hands or just another approach? , 2022, Arthroplasty.

[2]  Guo‐chun Zha,et al.  Patient-reported results of simultaneous direct anterior approach and posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasties performed in the same patients , 2021, Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[3]  Renée Huggard,et al.  Short-Term Clinical Assessment of Hip Hemi-Arthroplasty in 11 Dogs , 2021, Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[4]  B. Holzapfel,et al.  Primary hip arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach , 2021, Operative Orthopädie und Traumatologie.

[5]  O. Lanz,et al.  Zurich Cementless Dual Mobility Cup for Canine Total Hip Prosthesis: Implant Characteristics and Surgical Outcome in 105 Cases , 2021, Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[6]  R. D. de Steiger,et al.  Early Rate of Revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty Related to Surgical Approach: An Analysis of 122,345 Primary Total Hip Arthroplasties. , 2020, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[7]  A. Mavrogenis,et al.  Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty Revisited. , 2020, JBJS reviews.

[8]  R. Jenkinson,et al.  Association Between Surgical Approach and Major Surgical Complications in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty. , 2020, JAMA.

[9]  O. Ljungqvist,et al.  Consensus statement for perioperative care in total hip replacement and total knee replacement surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations , 2019, Acta orthopaedica.

[10]  M. Stilling,et al.  Posterior or anterolateral approach in hip joint arthroplasty ‐ Impact on frontal plane moment , 2018, Clinical biomechanics.

[11]  Kathleen C. Madara,et al.  The effect of surgical approach on gait mechanics after total hip arthroplasty. , 2018, Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology.

[12]  M. Maru,et al.  Scanning Electron Microscopy and Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy as a Valuable Tool to Investigate the Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene Wear Mechanisms and Debris in Hip Implants. , 2018, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[13]  R. Mittal,et al.  Early mobilisation after total hip or knee arthroplasty: A multicentre prospective observational study , 2017, PloS one.

[14]  Brendan T. Higgins,et al.  Anterior vs. posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty, a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2015, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[15]  A. Ranawat,et al.  Does the Direct Anterior Approach in THA Offer Faster Rehabilitation and Comparable Safety to the Posterior Approach? , 2014, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[16]  R. Tuan,et al.  Comparison of minimally invasive direct anterior versus posterior total hip arthroplasty based on inflammation and muscle damage markers. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[17]  W. Liska.  Micro total hip replacement for dogs and cats: surgical technique and outcomes. , 2010, Veterinary surgery : VS.

[18]  Alberto Leardini,et al.  A prospective randomized assessment of earlier functional recovery in THA patients treated by minimally invasive direct anterior approach: a gait analysis study. , 2009, Clinical biomechanics.

[19]  H. Yoshikawa,et al.  A clinical comparative study of the direct anterior with mini-posterior approach: two consecutive series. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[20]  T. Guerrero,et al.  Zurich cementless total hip replacement: retrospective evaluation of 2nd generation implants in 60 dogs. , 2009, Veterinary surgery : VS.

[21]  R Michael Meneghini,et al.  A randomized, prospective study of 3 minimally invasive surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty: comprehensive gait analysis. , 2008, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[22]  D. Beverland,et al.  Comparison of immediate postoperative walking ability in patients receiving minimally invasive and standard-incision hip arthroplasty: a prospective blinded study. , 2007, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[23]  Young-Hoo Kim.  Comparison of primary total hip arthroplasties performed with a minimally invasive technique or a standard technique: a prospective and randomized study. , 2006, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[24]  T. Sculco,et al.  Minimally invasive total hip replacement: the posterolateral approach. , 2006, American journal of orthopedics.

[25]  A. Kapatkin,et al.  Complications and radiographic findings following cemented total hip replacement , 2006, Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[26]  M. Sundaram,et al.  Heterotopic ossification: a review , 2005, Skeletal Radiology.

[27]  Thomas P Sculco,et al.  Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. , 2004, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[28]  Ann L. Johnson,et al.  An animal model for interface tissue formation in cemented hip replacements. , 2004, Veterinary surgery : VS.

[29]  J. Dyce,et al.  Retrospective analysis of canine miniature total hip prostheses. , 2003, Veterinary surgery : VS.

[30]  D. Howie,et al.  An ovine model for total hip replacement: operative procedure and complications , 2001, Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[31]  M. F. Yeo,et al.  The skeletal response to matt and polished cemented femoral stems. , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[32]  D Dowson,et al.  A comparative joint simulator study of the wear of metal-on-metal and alternative material combinations in hip replacements , 2000, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[33]  J. Kabo,et al.  Ultra-high-molecular weight polyethylene wear: an in vitro comparison of acetabular metal types and polished surfaces. , 1999, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[34]  A Rohlmann,et al.  Hip joint forces in sheep. , 1999, Journal of biomechanics.

[35]  S. Budsberg,et al.  Prospective evaluation of ground reaction forces in dogs undergoing unilateral total hip replacement. , 1996, American journal of veterinary research.

[36]  A. Litsky,et al.  Technique and Results for Total Hip Replacement in Sheep: An Experimental Model , 1996, Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[37]  M. Olmstead,et al.  Canine cemented total hip replacements: state of the art. , 1995, The Journal of small animal practice.

[38]  J. Pritchett.  Femoral Bone Loss Following Hip Replacement: A Comparative Study , 1995, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[39]  J. Wark,et al.  The potential of sheep for the study of osteopenia: current status and comparison with other animal models. , 1995, Bone.

[40]  M. Olmstead.  The canine cemented modular total hip prosthesis. , 1995, Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association.

[41]  W. Harris,et al.  Determination of loading parameters in the canine hip in vivo. , 1993, Journal of biomechanics.

[42]  R Vanderby,et al.  Canine intersegmental hip joint forces and moments before and after cemented total hip replacement. , 1991, Journal of biomechanics.

[43]  D. Howie,et al.  Synovial macrophage response to aluminium oxide ceramic and cobalt-chrome alloy wear particles in rats. , 1988, Biomaterials.

[44]  D. Howie,et al.  The synovial response to intraarticular cobalt-chrome wear particles. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[45]  P. Wood,et al.  Selection of an animal model for resurfacing hip arthroplasty. , 1987, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[46]  A Rohlmann,et al.  A comparison of hip joint forces in sheep, dog and man. , 1984, Journal of biomechanics.

[47]  R. B. Hohn,et al.  A five-year study of 221 total hip replacements in the dog. , 1983, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association.