Abstract
Our working hypothesis was that minimally invasive surgery was superior to conventional surgery for total hip arthroplasty procedure. We compared THR results in the minimally invasive posterior approach with THR results in the conventional posterior approach. Prospective, randomised trial. Fifty patients were selected and then divided into two groups based on treatment (minimally invasive posterior approach or conventional posterior approach). Perioperative bleeding, postoperative pain, time of recovery, component orientation, complications and functional results. One year follow-up. No differences were found in blood loss, surgical time, component orientation, rate of complications or functional result. The minimally invasive lateral approach produced less postoperative pain and a faster recovery, with a shorter hospital stay and earlier walking-start, and a positive economic impact with 5% of the total process cost saved. Minimally invasive surgery permits less postoperative pain, faster recovery and a positive economic saving, without differences in the rest of the items studied.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
