title: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the standard versus mini-incision posterior approach to total hip arthroplasty.
abstract: The mini-incision posterior approach may appeal to surgeons comfortable with the standard posterior approach to the hip. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of these two approaches. Twelve randomised controlled trials and four non-randomised trials comprising of 1498 total hip arthroplasties were included. The mini-incision posterior approach was associated with an early improvement in Harris hip score of 1.8 points (P<0.001), reduced operating time (5minutes, P<0.001), length of hospital stay (14hours, P<0.001), intraoperative and total blood loss (63ml, P<0.001 and 119ml, P<0.001 respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of dislocation, nerve injury, infection or venous thromboembolic events. The minimally invasive posterior approach appears to provide a safe and acceptable alternative to the standard incision posterior approach.
authors.affiliation: University of Bristol Musculoskeletal Research Unit, AOC (Lower Level), Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.
authors.forename: James R
authors.initials: JR
authors.lastname: Berstock
authors.affiliation: University of Bristol Musculoskeletal Research Unit, AOC (Lower Level), Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.
authors.forename: Ashley W
authors.initials: AW
authors.lastname: Blom
authors.affiliation: University of Bristol Musculoskeletal Research Unit, AOC (Lower Level), Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK.
authors.forename: Andrew D
authors.initials: AD
authors.lastname: Beswick
mesh_terms: D019644:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D019060:Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D016896:Treatment Outcome
keywords: arthroplasty; hip; meta-analysis; replacement; review