Comparison of postoperative effectiveness of less invasive short external rotator sparing approach versus standard posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty

Abstract

BackgroundMost of the studies assessing the corrective posterior total hip arthroplasty (THA) mainly focused on the mini-incision approach. Studies exploring the short external rotator sparing approach are rare. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effectiveness of standard posterior approach and short external rotator sparing approach.MethodsThis prospective observational study included 126 patients who underwent THA in June 2017–June 2018. Patients were assigned to standard (standard posterior approach) and corrective (short external rotator sparing approach) groups based on the surgical method. Surgical data were recorded postoperatively. Postoperative hip joint recovery was assessed using the times to ambulation and independent stair use, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, Harris score, and Oxford hip score (OHS) at 2 and 8 postoperative weeks. The visual analog scale (VAS) was used for postoperative pain assessment.ResultsPostoperative changes of creatine kinase (CK), myoglobin, CRP, and prosthesis position were similar in both groups (P > 0.05). However, intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.001) and postoperative 6-h drainage volume (P = 0.03), hospital stay, blood transfusion rate, and times to ambulation and independent stair use were significantly reduced in the corrective group. Postoperatively, Oxford, and WOMAC scores significantly decreased in both groups. After surgery, the VAS score was more overtly decreased in the corrective group compared with the standard group.ConclusionsThis study concluded that the less invasive short external rotator sparing approach for THA caused less damage, reducing perioperative blood loss, shortening functional recovery time, maintaining prosthesis stability, and improving postoperative pain.