Anterior vs. Posterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty, a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Journal of Arthroplasty

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 419-434

  Higgins, Brendan T ^a,b   Barlow, Daniel R ^b,c   Heagerty, Nathan E ^b   Lin, Tim J ^a,b  

^a DARTMOUTH HITCHCOCK MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b DARTMOUTH INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH POLICY AND CLINICAL PRACTICE   (United States)

^c DARTMOUTH MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Anterior; Approach; Patient reported outcomes; Posterior; Total hip arthroplasty

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; DISLOCATION; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; KNEE RADIOGRAPHY; LENGTH OF STAY; META ANALYSIS; ORTHOPEDIC SURGEON; PATIENT PREFERENCE; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL PATIENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ADVERSE EFFECTS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HIP REPLACEMENT; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; PROCEDURES;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; HUMANS; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP;

EID: 84924352405     PISSN: 08835403     EISSN: 15328406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.10.020     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Chang R.W., Pellisier J.M., Hazen G.B. A cost-effectiveness analysis of total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the hip. JAMA 1996, 275(11):858.
2. Lavernia C.J., Alcerro J.C. Quality of life and cost-effectiveness 1year after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011, 26(5):705.
3. Ethgen O., Bruyere O., Richy F., et al. Health-related quality of life in total hip and total knee arthroplasty. A qualitative and systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86-A(5):963.
4. Kurtz S., Mowat F., Ong K., et al. Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87(7):1487.
5. Kurtz S., Ong K., Lau E., et al. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007, 89(4):780.
6. Waddell J., Johnson K., Hein W., et al. Orthopaedic practice in total hip arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty: results from the Global Orthopaedic Registry (GLORY). Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2010, 39(9 Suppl.):5.
7. Kennon R.E., Keggi J.M., Wetmore R.S., et al. Total hip arthroplasty through a minimally invasive anterior surgical approach. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003, 85-A(Suppl. 4):39.
8. Matta J.M., Shahrdar C., Ferguson T. Single-incision anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty on an orthopaedic table. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005, 441:115.
9. Sariali E., Leonard P., Mamoudy P. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty using Hueter anterior approach. J Arthroplasty 2008, 23(2):266.
10. Siguier T., Siguier M., Brumpt B. Mini-incision anterior approach does not increase dislocation rate: a study of 1037 total hip replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004, (426):164.
11. Daltroy L.H., Morlino C.I., Eaton H.M., et al. Preoperative education for total hip and knee replacement patients. Arthritis Care Res 1998, 11(6):469.
12. Kim S., Losina E., Solomon D.H., et al. Effectiveness of clinical pathways for total knee and total hip arthroplasty: literature review. J Arthroplasty 2003, 18(1):69.
13. Pour A.E., Parvizi J., Sharkey P.F., et al. Minimally invasive hip arthroplasty: what role does patient preconditioning play?. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1920, 89(9):2007.
14. Higgins J.P.T., G Se Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.2. Available from The Cochrane Collaboration 2009, [updated September 2009].
15. Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009, 151(4):264.
16. Harris W.H. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1969, 51(4):737.
17. Jenkinson C., Layte R., Jenkinson D., et al. A shorter form health survey: can the SF-12 replicate results from the SF-36 in longitudinal studies?. J Public Health Med 1997, 19(2):179.
18. Ware J.E., Sherbourne C.D. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992, 30(6):473.
19. Bijur P.E., Silver W., Gallagher E.J. Reliability of the visual analog scale for measurement of acute pain. Acad Emerg Med 2001, 8(12):1153.
20. Martin R.L., Kelly B.T., Philippon M.J. Evidence of validity for the hip outcome score. Arthroscopy 2006, 22(12):1304.
21. Bellamy N., Buchanan W.W., Goldsmith C.H., et al. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1833, 15(12):1988.
22. Nilsdotter A.K., Lohmander L.S., Klassbo M., et al. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)-validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2003, 4:10.
23. D'Aubigne R.M., Postel M. Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1954, 36-A(3):451.
24. Naal F.D., Impellizzeri F.M., Leunig M. Which is the best activity rating scale for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009, 467(4):958.
25. Dawson J., Fitzpatrick R., Carr A., et al. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1996, 78(2):185.
26. Kuribayashi M., Takahashi K.A., Fujioka M., et al. Reliability and validity of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association hip score. J Orthop Sci 2010, 15(4):452.
27. Barrett W.P., Turner S.E., Leopold J.P. Prospective randomized study of direct anterior vs postero-lateral approach for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013, 28(9):1634.
28. Hananouchi T., Takao M., Nishii T., et al. Comparison of navigation accuracy in THA between the mini-anterior and -posterior approaches. Int J Med Robot 2009, 5(1):20.
29. Maffiuletti N.A., Impellizzeri F.M., Widler K., et al. Spatiotemporal parameters of gait after total hip replacement: anterior versus posterior approach. Orthop Clin North Am 2009, 40(3):407.
30. Pilot P., Kerens B., Draijer W.F., et al. Is minimally invasive surgery less invasive in total hip replacement? A pilot study. Injury 2006, 37(Suppl. 5):S17. [Erratum appears in Injury. 2007 Oct;38(10):1224].
31. Rathod P.A., Bhalla S., Deshmukh A.J., et al. Does fluoroscopy with anterior hip arthoplasty decrease acetabular cup variability compared with a nonguided posterior approach?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014, 472(6):1877.
32. Rodriguez J.A., Deshmukh A.J., Rathod P.A., et al. Does the direct anterior approach in THA offer faster rehabilitation and comparable safety to the posterior approach?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014, 472(2):455.
33. Spaans A.J., van den Hout J.A., Bolder S.B. High complication rate in the early experience of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty by the direct anterior approach. Acta Orthop 2012, 83(4):342.
34. Higgins J.P., Altman D.G., Gotzsche P.C., et al. Cochrane Bias Methods G, Cochrane Statistical Methods G. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011, 343:d5928.
35. Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 2010, 25(9):603.
36. Remote cardiac monitoring: a systematic review. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2007, 100.
37. Review Manager (RevMan) [Computer program]. Version 5.2 2012, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen.
38. Asotic M., Ljuca F., Grubor P., et al. Choice of surgical approach with alloplastic hip surgery. Med Arh 2012, 66(4):249.
39. Zhang X.L., Wang Q., Jiang Y., et al. Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty with anterior incision. Chung Hua Wai Ko Tsa Chih 2006, 44(8):512.
40. Bergin P.F., Doppelt J.D., Kephart C.J., et al. Comparison of minimally invasive direct anterior versus posterior total hip arthroplasty based on inflammation and muscle damage markers. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011, 93(15):1392.
41. Martin C.T., Pugely A.J., Gao Y., et al. A comparison of hospital length of stay and short-term morbidity between the anterior and the posterior approaches to total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013, 28(5):849.
42. Nakata K., Nishikawa M., Yamamoto K., et al. A clinical comparative study of the direct anterior with mini-posterior approach: two consecutive series. J Arthroplasty 2009, 24(5):698.
43. Nam D., Sculco P.K., Abdel M.P., et al. Leg-length inequalities following THA based on surgical technique. Orthopedics 2013, 36(4):e395.
44. Rathod P.A., Orishimo K.F., Kremenic I.J., et al. Similar improvement in gait parameters following direct anterior & posterior approach total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2014, 29(6):1261.
45. Reininga I.H., Stevens M., Wagenmakers R., et al. Comparison of gait in patients following a computer-navigated minimally invasive anterior approach and a conventional posterolateral approach for total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Res 2013, 31(2):288.
46. Schweppe M.L., Seyler T.M., Plate J.F., et al. Does surgical approach in total hip arthroplasty affect rehabilitation, discharge disposition, and readmission rate?. Surg Technol Int 2013, XXIII.
47. Sugano N., Takao M., Sakai T., et al. Comparison of mini-incision total hip arthroplasty through an anterior approach and a posterior approach using navigation. Orthop Clin North Am 2009, 40(3):365.
48. Ward S.R., Jones R.E., Long W.T., et al. Functional recovery of muscles after minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 2008, 57:249.
49. Zawadsky M.W., Paulus M.C., Murray P.J., et al. Early outcome comparison between the direct anterior approach and the mini-incision posterior approach for primary total hip arthroplasty: 150 consecutive cases. J Arthroplasty 2014, 29(6):1256.
50. Wright J.G., Swiontkowski M.F., Heckman J.D. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003, 85-A(1):1.
51. Lewinnek G.E., Lewis J.L., Tarr R., et al. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1978, 60(2):217.
52. Jolles B.M., Bogoch E.R. Posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults with osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2004, (1):CD003828.
53. Jolles B.M., Bogoch E.R. Surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty: direct lateral or posterior?. J Rheumatol 2004, 31(9):1790.
54. Jolles B.M., Bogoch E.R. Posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults with osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, (3):CD003828.
55. Gagnier J.J., Kellam P.J. Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews in the orthopaedic literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013, 95(11):e771.
56. Hananouchi T., Takao M., Nishii T., et al. Comparison of navigation accuracy in THA between the mini-anterior and -posterior approaches. Int J Med Robot 2009, 5(1):20.
57. Nakata K., Nishikawa M., Yamamoto K., et al. A clinical comparative study of the direct anterior with mini-posterior approach: two consecutive series. J Arthroplasty 2009, 24(5):698.
58. Martin C.T., Pugely A.J., Gao Y., et al. A comparison of hospital length of stay and short-term morbidity between the anterior and the posterior approaches to total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013, 28(5):849.
59. Barrett W.P., Turner S.E., Leopold J.P. Prospective randomized study of direct anterior vs postero-lateral approach for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013, 28(9):1634.
60. Maffiuletti N.A., Impellizzeri F.M., Widler K., et al. Spatiotemporal parameters of gait after total hip replacement: anterior versus posterior approach. Orthop Clin North Am 2009, 40(3):407.
61. Moore A.T. The self-locking metal hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1957, 39-A(4):811.
62. Pilot P., Kerens B., Draijer W.F., et al. Is minimally invasive surgery less invasive in total hip replacement? A pilot study. Injury 2006, 37(Suppl. 5):S17. [Erratum appears in Injury. 2007 Oct;38(10):1224].
63. Bremer A.K., Kalberer F., Pfirrmann C.W., 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 Bone Joint Surg Br 2011, 93(7):886.
64. Nilsdotter A., Bremander A. Measures of hip function and symptoms: Harris Hip Score (HHS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Lequesne Index of Severity for Osteoarthritis of the Hip (LISOH), and American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) Hip and Knee Questionnaire. Arthritis Res 2011, 63(Suppl. 11):S200.
65. Harris W.H. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1969, 51(4):737.
66. Nilsdotter A.K., Lohmander L.S., Klassbo M., et al. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)-validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2003, 4:10.
67. Jenkinson C., Layte R., Jenkinson D., et al. A shorter form health survey: can the SF-12 replicate results from the SF-36 in longitudinal studies?. J Public Health Med 1997, 19(2):179.
68. Ware J.E., Sherbourne C.D. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992, 30(6):473.
69. D'Aubigne R.M., Postel M. Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1954, 36-A(3):451.
70. Dawson J., Fitzpatrick R., Carr A., et al. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996, 78(2):185.
71. Bellamy N., Buchanan W.W., Goldsmith C.H., et al. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988, 15(12):1833.
72. Matsumoto T., Kaneuji A., Hiejima Y., et al. Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ): a patient-based evaluation tool for hip-joint disease. The Subcommittee on Hip Disease Evaluation of the Clinical Outcome Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association. J Orthop Sci 2012, 17(1):25.
73. Kuribayashi M., Takahashi K.A., Fujioka M., et al. Reliability and validity of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association hip score. J Orthop Sci 2010, 15(4):452.
74. Lewinnek G.E., Lewis J.L., Tarr R., et al. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1978, 60(2):217.
75. Higgins J.P., Altman D.G., Gotzsche P.C., et al. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2011, 343:d5928.
76. Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 2010, 25(9):603.
77. Remote cardiac monitoring: a systematic review. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2007, 100. [Available at: http://www.cms.gov/determinationprocess/downloads/id51ta.pdf. Accessed October 28, 2010].
78. Wright J.G., Swiontkowski M.F., Heckman J.D. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003, 85-A(1):1.