Conventional Posterior Approach Research Articles

Clinical Outcomes of Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty with a Conjoined Tendon-Preserving Posterior Approach for Femoral Neck Fractures.

Background and Objectives: The conventional posterior approach in the lateral decubitus position is widely used for femoral neck fractures in femoral hemiarthroplasty. Postoperative dislocation is the major problem with this approach. The conjoined tendon-preserving posterior (CPP) approach is a less invasive surgical approach than the conventional posterior approach to the hip, maintains posterior stability, and preserves short external rotators and joint capsules. However, the mention was required to avoid muscle damage and whether muscle damage affects postoperative dislocation or not. The current study aimed to evaluate the clinical results of the CPP approach in hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures and identify muscle damage risk factors. Materials and Methods: This study was a retrospective cohort study and included 170 hips in 168 patients. The mean age at the operation was 81.2 years. The preservation rate of the internal obturator muscle and gemellus inferior muscle and factors related to intraoperative short rotator muscle injury were investigated retrospectively. The postoperative complications and the relation between muscle damage and postoperative dislocation were investigated. Results: In the four hips (2.3%) with the obturator internus muscle damage, thirty-eight hips (22.4%) with gemellus inferior muscle damage were detected; in the muscle-damaged cases, the high body mass index (BMI) was significantly higher. The complication occurred in four hips (2.3%), including postoperative posterior dislocation in one hip without muscle damage (0.6%). Postoperative infection occurred in one hip (0.6%), and peroneal or sciatic nerve paralysis was suspected in two hips (1.1%). Conclusions: Compared to the conventional posterior approach in previous reports, the CPP approach reduces postoperative dislocation. A higher BMI is a risk factor for muscle damage, and the gemellus inferior muscle damage has no effect on postoperative dislocation. The CPP approach for BHA appeared to be an effective treatment method.

Which approach of total hip arthroplasty is the best efficacy and least complication?

Total hip arthroplasty is as an effective intervention to relieve pain and improve hip function. Approaches of the hip have been exhaustively explored about pros and cons. The efficacy and the complications of hip approaches remains inconclusive. This study conducted an umbrella review to systematically appraise previous meta-analysis (MAs) including conventional posterior approach (PA), and minimally invasive surgeries as the lateral approach (LA), direct anterior approach (DAA), 2-incisions method, mini-lateral approach and the newest technique direct superior approach (DSA) or supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPath). To compare the efficacy and complications of hip approaches that have been published in all MAs and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). MAs were identified from MEDLINE and Scopus from inception until 2023. RCTs were then updated from the latest MA to September 2023. This study included studies which compared hip approaches and reported at least one outcome such as Harris Hip Score (HHS), dislocation, intra-operative fracture, wound complication, nerve injury, operative time, operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, incision length and VAS pain. Data were independently selected, extracted and assessed by two reviewers. Network MA and cluster rank and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were estimated for treatment efficacy and safety. Finally, twenty-eight MAs (40 RCTs), and 13 RCTs were retrieved. In total 47 RCTs were included for reanalysis. The results of corrected covered area showed high degree (13.80%). Among 47 RCTs, most of the studies were low risk of bias in part of random process and outcome reporting, while other domains were medium to high risk of bias. DAA significantly provided higher HHS at three months than PA [pooled unstandardized mean difference (USMD): 3.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98, 6.00 with SUCRA: 85.9], followed by DSA/SuperPath (USMD: 1.57, 95%CI: -1.55, 4.69 with SUCRA: 57.6). All approaches had indifferent dislocation and intraoperative fracture rates. SUCRA comparing early functional outcome and composite complications (dislocation, intra-operative fracture, wound complication, and nerve injury) found DAA was the best approach followed by DSA/SuperPath. DSA/SuperPath had better earlier functional outcome than PA, but still could not overcome the result of DAA. This technique might be the other preferred option with acceptable complications.

Does robot-assisted surgery reduce leg length discrepancy in total hip replacement? Robot-assisted posterior approach versus direct anterior approach and manual posterior approach: a propensity score-matching study

BackgroundAdvocates of robot-assisted technique argue that robots could improve leg length restoration in total hip replacement. However, there were few studies to compare the robot-assisted posterior approach (RPA) with conventional posterior approach (PA) THA and direct anterior approach (DAA) THA in LLD. This study aimed to determine whether robot-assisted techniques could significantly reduce LLD compared to manual DAA and manual PA.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the cohort of consecutive ONFH patients who underwent THA robot-assisted posterior, manual posterior, and manual DAA from January 2018 to December 2020 in one institution. One experienced surgeon performed all procedures. We calculated the propensity score to match similar patients in different groups by multivariate logistic regression analysis for each patient. We included confounders consisting of age at the time of surgery, sex, body mass index (BMI), and preoperative LLD. Postoperative LLD and Harris hip scores (HHS) at two years after surgery of different cohorts were compared.ResultWe analyzed 267 ONFH patients treated with RPA, DAA, or PA (73 RPA patients, 99 DAA patients, and 95 PA patients). After propensity score matching, we generated cohorts of 40 patients in DAA and RPA groups. And we found no significant difference in postoperative LLD between RPA and DAA cohorts (4.10 ± 3.50 mm vs 4.60 ± 4.14 mm, p = 0.577) in this study. The HHS at 2 years postoperatively were 87.04 ± 7.06 vs 85.33 ± 8.34 p = 0.202. After propensity score matching, we generated cohorts of 58 patients in manual PA and RPA groups. And there were significant differences in postoperative LLD between the RPA and PA cohorts. (3.98 ± 3.27 mm vs 5.38 ± 3.68 mm, p = 0.031). The HHS at 2 years postoperatively were 89.38 ± 6.81 vs 85.33 ± 8.81 p = 0.019. After propensity score matching, we generated cohorts of 75 patients in manual DAA and PA groups. And there were significant differences in postoperative LLD between the DAA and PA cohorts. (4.03 ± 3.93 mm vs 5.39 ± 3.83 mm, p = 0.031) The HHS at 2 years postoperatively were 89.71 ± 6.18 vs 86.91 ± 7.20 p = 0.012.ConclusionThis study found no significant difference in postoperative LLD between RPA and DAA, but we found a significant difference between RPA and manual PA, DAA and manual PA in ONFH patients. We found a significant advantage in leg length restoration in primary total hip arthroplasty with robot-assisted surgery.

Clinical outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using a modified posterior spinous process-splitting approach for lumbar degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis: a prospective cohort study.

In the conventional posterior approach to the lumbar spine for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), the paravertebral muscles are stripped from the spinous process. The authors developed a novel surgical procedure in which TLIF was performed via a modified spinous process-splitting (SPS) approach that enabled the preservation of the attachment of the paravertebral muscles to the spinous process. The SPS TLIF group comprised 52 patients with lumbar degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis who underwent surgery using a modified SPS TLIF technique, whereas the control group comprised 54 patients who underwent conventional TLIF. Compared with the control group, the SPS TLIF group had a significantly shorter operation time, smaller intra- and postoperative blood loss volumes, and shorter hospital stay and time to ambulation (p < 0.05). The SPS TLIF group had a lower mean visual analog scale score for back pain than the control group on both postoperative day 3 and at 2 years postoperatively (p < 0.05). Follow-up MRI showed changes in the paravertebral muscles in 46 of 54 patients (85%) in the control group and 5 of 52 patients (10%) in the SPS TLIF group (p < 0.001). This novel technique may be a useful alternative to the conventional posterior approach for TLIF.

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Thoracic Spinal Stenosis

In conventional thoracic laminectomy, postoperative complications such as dural tears, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, postoperative infection, and iatrogenic spinal cord injury are relatively common. To address these issues, unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) techniques for thoracic laminectomy have been developed and published, demonstrating various advantages over conventional thoracic laminectomy with satisfactory clinical results. In comparison to conventional thoracic laminectomy, the UBE decompression technique with the unilateral approach and bilateral decompression (ULBD) appears to be safe and effective for treating thoracic ossified ligamentum flavum (OLF) or thoracic spinal stenosis. Thoracic ULBD by UBE preserves the paraspinal muscle and ligament that would otherwise be resected during the conventional posterior approach, and it has the added benefit of reducing back pain and muscle atrophy. This manuscript covers the technical aspects of UBE implementation using thoracic ULBD in patients with thoracic OLF or thoracic spinal stenosis, the indications and benefits of this procedure, and tips for preventing complications. With a review of previously published articles on thoracic laminectomy by UBE, we also summarize whether the procedure is safe and can prevent cord injuries.

Prospective study comparing early functional outcome and gait analysis in femoral neck fracture treated by cemented hemiarthroplasty using modified Hardinge approach and conventional posterior approach

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background: &lt;/strong&gt;A prospective study was done to compare the outcomes of management of fracture neck of femur by cemented hemiarthroplasty using modified Hardinge approach and conventional posterior approach&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; The 2019 to 2022 50 patients underwent bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture. Group A (Femoral neck fracture treated using conventional posterior approach) and group B (Femoral neck fracture treated using modified Hardinge approach) with 25 patients in each group. Outcomes were evaluated based on mean surgical time and Harris hip score and SF-36.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; Mean duration of surgery in minutes was more for modified Hardinge approach. Harris hip score with standard deviation for modified Hardinge Approach for follow-ups was better and statistically significant than posterior approach. Similarly, quality of life after surgery, in terms of mean SF-36 score with standard deviation for modified Hardinge approach was better and statistically significant than posterior approach. Modified Hardinge approach has fewer complications in comparison to the posterior approach. With the advantages comes a longer learning curve to operate without complications. Hence, with proper surgical technique, and proper tight closure, we prefer the modified Hardinge approach over other approaches as it had nil dislocations and abductor lurch.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; Modified Hardinge approach for hip arthroplasty in elderly people with femoral neck fracture provide significant benefit in the early post operative period when compared to conventional posterior approach in terms of post operative pain, time of recovery, dislocation rate and quality of life.&lt;/p&gt;

Comparison of Dislocation and Outcome Between Piriformis-Sparing and Conventional Posterior Approach After Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture in Patients Over 60 Years

BackgroundHemiarthroplasty is a treatment option for femoral neck fractures in patients aged more than 60 years and postoperative dislocation after a posterior approach is not uncommon. The piriformis tendon is one of the structures providing posterior hip stability. However, evidence of piriformis-sparing approach in hemiarthroplasty is unclear regarding a reduced dislocation rate. MethodsBetween January 2017 and December 2019, 321 patients underwent a posterior approach in consecutive cohorts for a hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures with the minimum 24 months follow-up time (24-60 months). There were two cohorts: (1) 129 underwent the conventional posterior (CP) approach and (2) 192 underwent the piriformis-sparing (PS) approach. The differences in dislocation rate, postoperative Harris Hip Society at 1 and 2 years and other surgical complications were compared in both groups. ResultsThere were 6 dislocations of 129 (4.7%) underwent the CP approach and 0 dislocation from 192 underwent the PS approach that had posterior hip dislocations (P = .004). In addition, the CP group had a significantly higher mortality rate (14.7% versus 7.3%, P = .031) and lower functional outcomes as assessed by mean Harris Hip Scores at 1 year (73 versus 78, P = .005) and 2 years postoperatively (73 versus 80, P < .001) relative to the PS group. ConclusionPS hemiarthroplasty was associated with a lower dislocation and mortality rate. Moreover, this approach gained a superior early to the mid-term functional outcome than the conventional posterior approach in elderly femoral neck fractures. Level of EvidenceII, prospective cohort study.

Comparison Between Minimally Invasive Anterolateral and Conventional Posterior Hip Approaches for Hemiarthroplasty in Hip Fractures

Purpose: To compare the results between minimally invasive anterolateral and conventional posterior hip approaches for hemiarthroplasty in hip fractures. Methods: The elderly patients who had undergone hip hemiarthroplasty for hip fractures in Maharaj Nakhon Si Thammarat Hospital, were randomly divided into two groups: minimally invasive anterolateral and posterior approach groups Data were collected from March 2020 to November 2021, which included the duration of the surgery, length of the surgical wound, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative days of walking with a walker, morphine dosage for pain relief, and postoperative complications. Results: No significant difference (P-value &gt; 0.05) was found between the baseline data of patients in both the groups, which included sex, age, body mass index, underlying musculoskeletal disease, and drug usage. The minimally invasive anterolateral approach group used an average surgical time of 53.48 ± 8.22 min, while the conventional posterior approach group required 65 ± 20.41 min; the length of the surgical wound was 7.78 ± 0.87 and 13.78 ± 1.37 cm, respectively; the volume of intraoperative bleeding was 82.17 ± 48.94 and 195.65 + 163.24 ml, respectively; the postoperative days of walking with a walker were 3.09 ± 0.92 and 6.59 ± 2.52 days, respectively; and the postoperative analgesic doses of morphine were 6.59 ± 2.80 and 11.09 ± 3.89 mg, respectively. The blood transfusion was required in 4 patients in the minimally invasive anterolateral approach group, while it was required in 14 patients in the conventional posterior approach group. Statistically significant (P-value &lt; 0.05). Postoperative complications included, prosthetic hip joint dislocation in a patient in each group and sciatic nerve neurapraxia in a patient in the conventional posterior approach group. Conclusions: Hip hemiarthroplasty with the minimally invasive anterolateral approach in elderly patients with hip fractures was found to be superior to the conventional posterior approach.

Association between Hip Center Position and Isokinetic Hip Muscle Performance after Anterolateral Muscle-Sparing Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background and objectives: The superior placement of the acetabular cup induced the delayed recovery of abductor muscle moment after total hip arthroplasty (THA) with a conventional posterior approach. The anterior-based muscle-sparing (ABMS) THA effectively reduces soft tissue damage, including muscles. The influence of hip center position on anterior-based muscle-sparing (ABMS) total hip arthroplasty (THA) for post-operative hip muscle strength was unclear. We evaluate whether the hip center position affects the recovery of hip muscle strength after ABMS THA. Materials and Methods: The study was performed as a retrospective cohort study, and included 38 hips in 38 patients that underwent primary ABMS THA. Muscle strength was measured using isokinetic dynamometry before the operation, and at 6 and 12 months after surgery. The horizontal and vertical centers of rotation (H-COR and V-COR), vertical shift (V-shift), leg length, and global femoral offset were determined radiographically in reference to a previous report. Results: A weak negative correlation was observed between abduction muscle strength at 6 months and V-shift; a V-shift more than 15 mm demonstrated significantly decreased abductor muscle strength at 6 months. Conclusions: The superior placement of the hip center caused delayed recovery of abductor muscle strength in hips with anterolateral minimally invasive THA. There seems to exist no biomechanical reason why the same should not also be the case for the muscle-sparing approach.

Comparison of the Posterior and Paraspinal Approaches for the Treatment of Thoracolumbar Burst Fractures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose: Burst fractures cause over half of all thoracolumbar fractures, for which the posterior approach has been considered the standard approach. The paraspinal approach has proven safe and effective for thoracolumbar injury. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes between the two approaches. Methods: This randomized controlled trial included 24 patients with isolated thoracolumbar burst fractures between July 2016 and August 2018. Patients were categorized into two groups: paraspinal and posterior approaches. The primary outcome was postoperative pain on days 1, 2, 3, and 14. The corrected Cobb’s angle; operation time; intraoperative blood loss; opioid usage on days 1, 2, and 3; Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, Thai version); and percentage reduction loss at 3 months were secondary outcomes. Participants were assessed on post-intervention days 1, 2, 3, 14, and 90. Results: The mean visual-analog-scale (VAS) scores on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, and 14 (8.6 ± 0.8, 7.1 ± 0.6, 5.5 ± 1.3, 5.5 ± 0.8); intraoperative blood loss (395.8 ± 113.7 mL); opioid usage on days 2 and 3 (13 ± 1.5 mg, 8.3 ± 1.9 mg); and postoperative ODI (23.5 ± 3.5) were significantly lower (P&lt;0.05) in the paraspinal-approach group than in the posterior-approach group (mean VAS on postoperative days 1, 2, 3, and 14 [9.2 ± 0.5, 8.3 ± 0.3, 7.5 ± 0.8, 6.7 ± 0.5]; intraoperative blood loss [590 ± 70.1 mL]; opioid usage on days 2 and 3 [15.8 ± 1.9 mg, 11.7 ± 1.6 mg]; and postoperative ODI [40 ± 4.2]). There was no statistical differences in operative time, corrected Cobb’s angle, and percentage reduction loss. Conclusions: The paraspinal approach is significantly advantageous over the conventional posterior approach regarding postoperative pain, intraoperative blood loss, opioid usage, and ODI at 3 months, thus corroborating the minimally invasive concept.

Diaphragm sparing mini open thoracotomy with standalone expandable cage: Observational study of a safe novel approach for stabilising thoracolumbar fractures

Objective: An ideal surgical procedure to any vertebral fracture with cord compression produces maximum decompression, without producing additional deficits, achieve fixation by fusion of minimum number of motion segments and maintain the corrected kyphosis without any long-term deterioration. Although conventional posterior approach provides three column fixation, it invariably devitalizes the strong paraspinal muscles and posterior ligamentous complex of the involved vertebra and the adjacent segments necessary for maintaining erect posture. The lateral approach too, damages the strongest portion of the vertebra, the pedicle and sometimes the diaphragm has to be cut open and re-sutured. Conventional anterior approaches are mainly used either as a part of combined approach where in, there is extensive destruction of anterior longitudinal ligament and crus of the diaphragm and have the limitation that they cannot address the T11 and T12 fractures without cutting open the diaphragm. The anterior approach is not usually attempted as it is not a familiar approach to the neurosurgeon and literature reports increased morbidity. The main aim of this study is to encourage the reader to employ a new anterior approach toward thoracolumbar fracture management.Materials and Methods: The chief author has devised a novel, safe, mini open, diaphragm sparing approach to address all these issues, exploring a corridor between medial margin of psoas and left crus of the diaphragm which is sufficient enough for good decompression of the cord and that even a standalone broad foot plated expandable cage for stabilization is effective in correction of kyphosis without posterior supplementation or potential respiratory complications.Results: All 37 operated patients recovered well and their kyphotic angles were maintained on follow up. All patients improved neurologically without any respiratory complications potentially associated with thoracotomy.Conclusion: This prospective study proved that kyphotic corrections were better, no subsidence rates observed, and were maintained at 1 year follow-up with this novel approach.

Comparison of short-term outcomes between minimal invasive superpath approach and conventional posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&lt;/strong&gt; The objective of current study was to compare the short-term outcomes between a cohort of patients that undergone total hip replacement by a superpath technique at the beginning of the surgeon's learning curve, and a cohort of patients that undergone a total hip replacement by a conventional posterior approach.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; A cohort of 22 patients was prospectively and randomly selected for being part of a superpath approach group or a conventional posterior approach group. Clinical evaluation was performed in two primary end-points - the third post-operative day and the first month after surgery - using physical exams as the “20 meter walking test” and the “30 seconds sit to stand test”, the Harris hip score, the visual analogue scale for pain. Radiological evaluation was also performed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; 11 patients underwent the superpath approach and 11 patients underwent the conventional posterior approach. The surgery time was 78.2 min in the superpath group and 59.4 min in the posterior group. The average hospital stay was 3.4 days in the superpath group and 5.3 days in the posterior group. When assessing pain improvement through VAS, it was found that both on the third postoperative day and on the first postoperative month, patients in the superpath group showed greater improvement. There were no differences in functional results with statistical significance. No complications were seen in both groups.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; Despite the longer surgical time seen with the superpath approach, it managed to significantly decrease the length of hospital stay and obtained better results in improving pain in the short term.&lt;/p&gt;

Assessment of the outcome of percutaneous pedicle screws in management of degenerative and traumatic dorsal and lumbar pathologies

BackgroundPercutaneous pedicle screw technique is relatively a recent technique that evolved the concept of posterior spinal instrumentation, utilizing familiar fluoroscopic landmarks to guide the procedure of screws insertion, which despite being technically demanding, it avoids the Musculo-ligamentous damage associated with the conventional posterior technique.Aim of the workThis study aims to report our experience in managing traumatic and degenerative spine pathologies by the minimally invasive percutaneous technique and assessing its radiological and functional outcome.Materials and methodsA prospective observational study that included the analysis of the functional, operative, biochemical, and radiological outcomes of 20 patients who underwent uniplanar fluoroscopic-guided dorsal and/or lumbar percutaneous pedicle screw fixation procedures with or without fusion using the sextant, longitude, and Spineart system and any reported complications between January 2018 and December 2019.ResultsThe clinical and radiological analysis of 100 percutaneous pedicle screws in degenerative (n:11) and traumatic (n:9) dorsal and/or lumbar cases revealed that the biomechanical stabilizing characteristics are comparable to the conventional posterior approach with the added benefits of the paraspinal muscle-sparing. Satisfactory functional outcome represented in the improvement of the postoperative back pain visual analog score and Oswestry Disability Index Score with acceptable morbidity and complications rate was noticed.ConclusionsPercutanous pedicle screw fixation is a landmark in the evolution of the minimally invasive spine surgery which can be a safe alternative to the conventional posterior muscle stripping technique with a comparable functional and radiological outcome and good biomechanical profile and an acceptable morbidity rate.

Pediatric SMA patients with complex spinal anatomy: Implementation and evaluation of a decision-tree algorithm for administration of nusinersen.

The approval of nusinersen for the treatment of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) has significantly changed the natural history of the disease. Nevertheless, scoliosis secondary to axial muscle weakness occurs at some point in most of patients with SMA and a conventional posterior interlaminar approach for intrathecal administration of nusinersen can be particularly challenging to perform in patients with severe scoliosis and/or previous spine fusion surgeries. We developed a protocol for the administration of nusinersen in pediatric patients, which includes a decision-tree algorithm that categorizes patients according to the estimated technical difficulty for the intrathecal administration. Complex spine patients were defined as those with a Cobb angle greater than 50° and/or a history of spinal surgery, while the rest of patients were considered non-complex. Nusinersen was successfully administered through a conventional non-CT-guided lumbar puncture in all 14 non-complex spine patients (110 out of 110 procedures; 100%). The feasibility of the intrathecal injection in the 15 complex spine patients was assessed by 3D CT. Administration was considered unfeasible in 7 out of these 15 patients according to imaging. In the 8 complex spine patients in whom the administration was considered feasible, conventional non-CT-guided lumbar punctures were successful only in 19 out of 53 procedures (36%). The remaining 34 procedures (64%) were guided by CT scan, all successful. Our work demonstrates that a cut-off point of 50° in Cobb angle and history of spinal surgery can reliably be used to anticipate the need for CT guidance in nusinersen administration.

Comparison of Anterior only and Combined Anterior and Posterior Approach in Treating Lumbosacral Tuberculosis

A combined anterior and posterior (AP) surgical approach is a popular treatment modality of lumbosacral tuberculosis, but it is often traumatic and complicated. The present study aims to find whether the anterior only approach with the ARCH plate system is less invasive than the AP approach in treating lumbosacral tuberculosis. The ARCH plate system is an innovative anatomic lumbosacral anterior multi-directional locking plate system which was devised with due consideration to the anatomic features of the lumbosacral spine and irregular destruction of involved vertebral endplates. In this retrospective study, 32 patients with lumbosacral tuberculosis underwent surgeries via either the anterior only approach (ARCH group, 18 patients) using the ARCH system or the conventional combined anterior and posterior approach (AP group, 14 patients). American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) scores, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), bone union status, ESR, CRP, intervertebral foraminal height between L5 and S1, the vertical height between the anterior upper edge of L5 and S1 vertebral body, lumbosacral angle, and the physiological lordosis of between L1 and S1 from both groups were recorded and compared. All patients were followed up for at least two years. The average duration of operation, blood loss, and length of hospital admission of the ARCH group (154.6 min, 361.1 ml&18.3days) was significantly smaller and shorter(p < 0.001, p < 0.001 & p = 0.008) that those of the AP group(465.5 min, 814.3 ml & 24.6days). The ODI score(p = 0.08, 0.471, 0.06, 0.07, 0.107), the VAS score(p = 0.099, 0.249, 0.073, 0.103, 0.273), the intervertebral foraminal height between L5 and S1(p = 0.826, 0.073, 0.085), L5-S1 height(p = 0.057, 0.234, 0.094), lumbosacral angle(p = 0.052, 0.242, 0.825), and L5-S1 lordosis(p = 0.146, 0.129, 0.053) of both groups showed no significant difference in any of the time points. The anterior only approach using the ARCH system is as effective as the combined anterior and posterior approach and is less traumatic in treating lumbosacral tuberculosis.

Conventional versus minimally invasive total hip replacement through the posterior approach

The rationale for minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is to minimize tissue damage in order to reduce blood loss, decrease postoperative pain, shorten hospital stay, and allow for faster rehabilitation. Objectives This study compares the short-term clinical and radiographic outcome between conventional and minimally invasive posterior approaches in total hip arthroplasty. Study Design & Methods We conducted a prospective, comparative pilot study containing 30 patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty between January 2017 and May 2017, 15 of them were operated through a conventional posterior approach and the other 15 were operated upon using a minimally invasive posterior approach. The exclusion criteria were severe protrusio or acetabular dysplasia as well as severe obesity (more than 120 kg body weight or a body mass index (BMI) > 40). For all patients, age, gender, indication, body mass index (BMI), preoperative hemoglobin and preoperative assessment using radiology, WOMAC and Harris hip scores were recorded. The patients were informed about the type of their operation. Results:There was a significant difference in the mean operative time (p < 0.001),rehabilitation and early return to workand usual activities (p < 0.001) in favour of the minimally invasive approach. Furthermore, there was no need for blood transfusion in the MIS group compared to 20% in the conventional group, better cosmetic results in the MIS group (mean scar length was 9.07 compared to 21.67 in the conventional approach) and more incidence of complications with the conventional approach (13.33% as compared to 0% in the MIS group). These differences were statistically highly significant (p < 0.0001). No significant differences were seen as regards the clinical outcome at 6 months post-operative (using the WOMAC and Harris hip scores) and the radiological results between in both groups. Conclusions:The minimally invasive posterior approach allows reduced blood loss, reduced operative time, decreased incidence of blood transfusion, faster rehabilitation and earlier return to workin total hip arthroplasty.

Hidden blood loss after hip hemiarthroplasty using the superPATH approach: A retrospective study

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare perioperative hidden blood loss after hip hemiarthroplasty via the SuperPATH approach and the conventional posterior approach (the Moore approach). Patients and methodsFrom January 2015 to January 2017, 130 patients (80.7 ± 6.0 years) with displaced femoral neck fracture (Garden type III or IV) undergoing hip hemiarthroplasty were included in this study. As a non-randomisation study, Fifty-two patients (SuperPATH group) were operated using the SuperPATH approach, and 78 patients (Moore group) were operated with the conventional posterior approach (Moore approach). The demographic and relevant clinical information of the patients were collected. According to the combination formulas of Nadler, Gross and Sehat, the hidden blood loss (HBL) of each patient was calculated. Student's t-test for independent samples was used to compare the normally distributed variables and the Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare variables not following a normal distribution. ResultsThe visible blood loss (VBL) in the SuperPATH group was 123.7 ± 47.5 ml, the hidden blood loss (HBL) was 1084.1 ± 816.8 ml and the HBL% was 82.7 ± 16.5%. In the Moore group, the VBL was 303.6 ± 139.6 ml, the HBL was 700.2 ± 563.8 ml and the HBL% was 61.5 ± 23.8%. The patients in the SuperPATH group had more HBL and HBL% (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed of total blood loss (TBL) between the two groups (P = 0.125). ConclusionsHBL should not be ignored in patients who underwent hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures, as it is a significant portion of TBL. Compared with the conventional approach, the SuperPATH approach had a greater amount of HBL. A better understanding of HBL after hip hemiarthroplasty may help surgeons improve clinical assessment and ensure patient safety.

Comparative cohort study of the SuperPath approach and the conventional posterior approach in primary cementless hip replacement surgery

Background and objectivesThere is no current consensus on the most suitable hip approach. However, there is a trend to reduce damage to soft tissue, which may have an influence on early outcomes. The SuperPath approach accesses the capsule maintaining integrity of the external rotators. The purpose of this study was to compare the SuperPath approach with the conventional posterior approach, in terms of early outcomes and radiological results. Material and methodsA cohort of 30 patients operated using the SuperPath approach was prospectively matched for age, gender, body mass index and hip function with 60 patients operated using a conventional posterior approach. Clinical evaluation was performed by the Harris score, Merle d’Aubigné score, reduced Western Ontario and McMasters Universities (WOMAC), Short-Form 12 (SF12), IHOT-ADV and IHOT-12 questionnaires. Radiological evaluation was also performed. ResultsPreoperatively, no significant differences were detected between cohorts. Skin-to-skin operation time and blood loss was higher in the SuperPath cohort. Length of stay was similar between cohorts. Clinical evaluation improved significantly from the preoperative values to the 1-year follow-up. At 3 months the SuperPath cohort showed better results for IHOT-12, and at 12 months for SF. Radiologically, there were no differences between cohorts. ConclusionThis prospective randomized study reveals that the learning curve for the SuperPath approach provides similar outcomes to the conventional posterior approach within the first year after surgery. The SuperPath approach was associated with longer skin-to-skin operation time, and greater blood loss.

Estudio de cohortes comparativo del abordaje Superpath con abordaje convencional posterior en cirugía protésica primaria de cadera no cementada: curva de aprendizaje y resultados a corto plazo

Background and objectivesThere is no current consensus on the most suitable hip approach. However, there is a trend to reduce damage to soft tissue, which may have an influence on early outcomes. The SuperPath approach accesses the capsule maintaining integrity of the external rotators. The purpose of this study was to compare the SuperPath approach with the conventional posterior approach, in terms of early outcomes and radiological results. Material and methodsA cohort of 30 patients operated using the SuperPath approach was prospectively matched for age, gender, body mass index and hip function with 60 patients operated using a conventional posterior approach. Clinical evaluation was performed by the Harris score, Merle d’Aubigné score, reduced Western Ontario and McMasters Universities (WOMAC), Short-Form 12 (SF12), IHOT-ADV and IHOT-12 questionnaires. Radiological evaluation was also performed. ResultsPreoperatively, no significant differences were detected between cohorts. Skin-to-skin operation time and blood loss was higher in the SuperPath cohort. Length of stay was similar between cohorts. Clinical evaluation improved significantly from the preoperative values to the 1-year follow-up. At 3 months the SuperPath cohort showed better results for IHOT-12, and at 12 months for SF. Radiologically, there were no differences between cohorts. ConclusionThis prospective randomized study reveals that the learning curve for the SuperPath approach provides similar outcomes to the conventional posterior approach within the first year after surgery. The Superpath approach was associated with longer skin-to-skin operation time, and greater blood loss.

Bilateral Anterior Innominate Osteotomy for Bladder Exstrophy.

Bladder exstrophy is a congenital condition that affects the genitourinary and musculoskeletal systems, and less commonly affects the intestinal system, with cloacal exstrophy. This condition results from abnormal migration of the mesenchyme, between the endoderm and ectoderm, leading to anterior rupture of the cloacal membrane. Numerous osseous morphologic changes are observed in bladder exstrophy. Rotational anomalies include external rotation of the posterior part of the pelvis and iliac wings, on average 12°, and acetabular retroversion1-3. Although various osteotomy types have been described for initial bladder exstrophy closure, the anterior approach has demonstrated positive outcomes in improving daytime continence, gait, and correction of the diastasis4. Thus, the anterior iliac osteotomy provides an effective method to help close the pelvic ring and decrease stress on the anterior abdominal wall during exstrophy closure. In addition, this technique promotes continence by reconfiguring, and thereby restoring, the fibrous symphyseal bar and pelvic floor musculature5. The steps of the procedure include (1) preoperative planning, (2) patient positioning, (3) incision, (4) identification of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve, (5) subperiosteal dissection of the iliac wing, (6) guide pin placement and anterior osteotomy, (7) posterior hinge osteotomy (for cloacal exstrophy and for patients ≥2 years old), (8) external fixator pin placement, (9) anterior internal fixation of the pubic symphysis (for cloacal exstrophy and for patients ≥2 years old), and (10) resumption of the urologic procedure followed by wound closure and application of external fixator. Numerous previous techniques for osteotomies in bladder exstrophy have been developed, starting with Shultz in 1958, who recognized the importance of bringing the pubic bones together for gait correction in exstrophy repair6. O'Phelan was the first, to our knowledge, to document outcomes of this bilateral posterior osteotomy technique to reduce tension from the externally rotated iliac bones and widened pubic symphysis in a 2-stage bladder exstrophy closure7. Other approaches have included an oblique iliac wing osteotomy and pubic ramotomy, described by Frey and Cohen in 19898. However, the latter approach inadequately restores the pelvic osseous relations except in female newborns who would have a small diastasis after manual rotation of the pelvis. This procedure has several advantages over the prior conventional posterior approach. These include better approximation and improved mobility of the pubic rami at the time of closure, prevention of vertical migration of the hemipelvis, direct visual placement of an external fixator and adjustment postoperatively, and no requirement for turning the patient during the operation. In addition, this procedure allows for adjunctive posterior osteotomy from the anterior approach to provide adequate closure in those with cloacal exstrophy, prior failed closure, or extreme diastasis of >6 cm9.