Financial impact of total hip arthroplasty: a comparison of anterior versus posterior surgical approaches.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Compared to the posterior approach, the anterior approach to total hip arthroplasty (THA) offers the potential for an accelerated recovery secondary to less dissection and therefore less pain in the immediate postoperative period. This offers potential financial benefit through a reduction in length of stay. This study retrospectively reviewed 98 anterior approach and 69 posterior approach THA cases (N = 167) to compare perioperative outcomes and cost-effectiveness.Methods
Patients who underwent anterior approach THA were discharged sooner than those who underwent posterior approach THA.Results
The anterior approach was also less expensive per patient than the posterior approach. Overall, differences in perioperative outcomes between these approaches to THA are less robust than previously reported. There is a significant difference in operative cost between these surgical approaches.Conclusions
Although there are many sources for this difference in cost, the predominant contributor is surgeon implant preference.
SUBMITTER: Joseph NM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5365406 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Financial impact of total hip arthroplasty: a comparison of anterior versus posterior surgical approaches.
Joseph Noah M NM Roberts Jared J Mulligan Michael T MT
Arthroplasty today 20160824 1
<h4>Background</h4>Compared to the posterior approach, the anterior approach to total hip arthroplasty (THA) offers the potential for an accelerated recovery secondary to less dissection and therefore less pain in the immediate postoperative period. This offers potential financial benefit through a reduction in length of stay. This study retrospectively reviewed 98 anterior approach and 69 posterior approach THA cases (N = 167) to compare perioperative outcomes and cost-effectiveness.<h4>Methods ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become one of the most reliable and patient-requested surgical interventions in all medicine. The procedure can be performed using a variety of surgical approaches, but the posterior approach, direct lateral approach, and direct anterior approach are by far the most common across the globe. This article highlights the history and technique for each of these common approaches. A review of outcomes and complications for each approach are also provided. Each approach has its own unique advantages and disadvantages, but all can be safely and successful utilized for THA. Strong, convincing, high-quality studies comparing the different approaches are lacking at this time. Surgeons are therefore recommended to choose whichever approach they are most comfortable and experienced using. Though not described here, THA can also be done using the anterolateral approach (also known as the Watson Jones approach) as well as the two-incision approach. In addition, recently, some surgeons are utilizing the so-called direct superior approach for THA. While these approaches are far less commonly utilized, they are recognized as viable alternatives to traditional approaches.
| S-EPMC5525517 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) is a successful surgical treatment for end-stage hip arthritis. There is controversy over whether the surgical approach leads to any differences in implant sizing, implant positioning, and clinical outcomes. This study sought to compare radiographic and clinical outcomes when performing primary THA through the direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterior approach (PA).MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing primary THA, 198 DAA patients were matched to 198 PA patients. Surgeries were performed by 3 fellowship-trained surgeons. Radiographic parameters analyzed were acetabular cup anteversion and abduction angles, femoral stem coronal alignment, femoral offset, and leg-length discrepancy. Postoperative complications, including periprosthetic joint infection, wound complications, periprosthetic fracture, and dislocation, were extracted from the medical record. Statistical analysis was performed to compare radiographic and clinical outcomes between groups.ResultsThere were no statistically significant differences for any postoperative complications between the 2 groups. One dislocation occurred in the PA group, and no dislocations occurred in the DAA group. DAA had a longer operative time (117 vs 79 minutes, P < .01). PA had a higher increase in femoral offset compared to the contralateral limb (2.76 mm vs 1.01 mm, P < .01), higher cup anteversion (26.17° vs 23.44°, P < .001), and higher use of dual mobility components (6.06% vs 1.01%, P = .007).ConclusionsBoth DAA and PA lead to acceptable clinical and radiographic outcomes for primary THA, with significant differences noted for cup position, femoral offset, and use of dual mobility components. These differences likely represent surgeon factors to help mitigate the risk for dislocation.
| S-EPMC11925570 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundA number of surgical approaches are utilized in total hip arthroplasty. It has been hypothesized that the anterior approach results in less muscle damage than the posterior approach. We prospectively analyzed biochemical markers of muscle damage and inflammation in patients treated with minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty with an anterior or posterior approach to provide objective evidence of the local soft-tissue injury at the time of arthroplasty.MethodsTwenty-nine patients treated with minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty through a direct anterior approach and twenty-eight patients treated with the same procedure through a posterior approach were prospectively analyzed. Perioperative and radiographic data were collected to ensure cohorts with similar characteristics. Serum creatine kinase (CK), C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1ß), and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) levels were measured preoperatively, in the post-anesthesia-care unit (except for the CRP level), and on postoperative days 1 and 2. The Student t test and Fisher exact test were used to make comparisons between the two groups. Independent predictors of elevation in levels of markers of inflammation and muscle damage were determined with use of multivariate logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe levels of the markers of inflammation were slightly decreased in the direct-anterior-approach group as compared with those in the posterior-approach group. The rise in the CK level in the posterior-approach group was 5.5 times higher than that in the anterior-approach group in the post-anesthesia-care unit (mean difference, 150.3 units/L [95% CI, 70.4 to 230.2]; p < 0.05) and nearly twice as high cumulatively (mean difference, 305.0 units/L [95% CI, -46.7 to 656.8]; p < 0.05).ConclusionsWe believe that the anterior total hip arthroplasty approach used in this study caused significantly less muscle damage than did the posterior surgical approach, as indicated by serum CK levels. The clinical importance of the rise in the CK level needs to be delineated by additional clinical studies. The overall physiologic burden, as demonstrated by measurement of inflammation marker levels, appears to be similar between the anterior and posterior approaches. Objective measurement of muscle damage and inflammation markers provides an unbiased way of determining the immediate effects of surgical intervention in patients treated with total hip arthroplasty.
| S-EPMC3143583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe ideal approach for a total hip arthroplasty (THA) would be kind to soft tissues, have the lowest complication rates and be easily reproducible. Although there have been several attempts to find the best approach for THA in the last decade, a definitive answer has not been found. We performed a prospective study to compare the direct anterior and posterior approaches for THA in terms of hospital length of stay, functional outcome, pain, implant position, complications and surgical time.MethodsA prospective, randomized, multicentre clinical study was conducted between February 2011 and July 2013, with an average follow-up of 55 months. Patients undergoing the direct anterior or posterior approach for THA were enrolled. Hospital length of stay, surgical time and complications were documented. The Harris Hip Score and visual analogue scale were used to monitor functional outcome and pain until 5 years postoperatively. Radiologic analysis was used to assess implant position.ResultsFifty-five patients (28 undergoing the direct anterior approach, 27 undergoing the posterior approach) were enrolled in this study. Length of stay, functional outcome, pain, implant position and complications were similar for the 2 approaches. There was a trend toward a better functional outcome for patients who underwent the direct anterior approach in the first 3 months postoperatively, with a peak at 4 weeks (Harris Hip Score 76.7 v. 68.7; p = 0.08). Average surgical time for the direct anterior approach was significantly longer (69.9 v. 45.7 min; p = 0.002).ConclusionThe direct anterior approach for THA appears to be a safe and effective option. However, there is no significant difference in hospital length of stay or postoperative recovery between the 2 approaches.Clinical trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT03673514.
| S-EPMC7608717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeMinimizing the decrease in muscular strength after total hip arthroplasty (THA) might allow patients to recover faster. We evaluated muscular strength in patients who were operated on using 3 surgical approaches. PATIENTS AND METHODs: In a prospective cohort study, 60 patients scheduled for primary THA were allocated to the direct lateral, posterior, or anterior approach. Leg press and abduction strength were evaluated 2 weeks or less preoperatively, 2 and 8 days postoperatively, and at 6-week and 3-month follow-up.ResultsDifferences in maximal strength change were greatest after 2 and 8 days. The posterior and anterior approaches produced less decrease in muscular strength than the direct lateral approach. 6 weeks postoperatively, the posterior approach produced greater increase in muscular strength than the direct lateral approach, and resulted in a greater increase in abduction strength than the anterior approach. At 3-month follow-up, no statistically significant differences between the groups were found. The operated legs were 18% weaker in leg press and 15% weaker in abduction than the unoperated legs, and the results were similar between groups.InterpretationThe posterior and anterior approaches appeared to have the least negative effect on abduction and leg press muscular strength in the first postoperative week; the posterior approach had the least negative effect, even up to 6 weeks postoperatively. THA patients have reduced muscle strength in the operated leg (compared to the unoperated leg) 3 months after surgery.
| S-EPMC4940587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLeg length discrepancy (LLD) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a clinical entity that deteriorates clinical outcomes and patients' satisfaction. Few articles have compared LLD after THA by different surgical approaches.MethodsA total of 358 consecutive patients who underwent primary THA between January 2016 and November 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. All 4 surgeons performed THA through both direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterior lateral approach (PLA). The primary outcome measurement was LLD. LLD was measured on post-operative anteroposterior bilateral hip radiograph. The secondary outcomes were acetabular abduction, acetabular anteversion, perceived LLD (pLLD) and HHS at 6 weeks, 1 year and 5 years. Intergroup analyses were performed using the Chi-square test for enumeration data and the independent sample t-test for quantitative data.ResultsThere was no inter-group difference in terms of patients' demographics. The DAA group had decreased LLD compared to the PLA group (3.0 ± 5.9mm vs. 4.2 ± 4.5mm, p = 0.027). Meanwhile, the DAA group had a smaller acetabular anteversion than the PLA group (12.9 ± 2.9 vs. 18.4 ± 2.9, p < 0.01). At 6-week follow-up, the DAA group had higher HHS (82.2 + 6.2 vs. 80.5 + 6.6, p = 0.015) and less pLLD (P = 0.001) compared to the PLA group.ConclusionsDAA results in more accurate leg length equalization, reduced pLLD, and improved short-term outcomes compared with PLA.
| S-EPMC11856386 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundComparisons of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) based on surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the United States are limited to series from single surgeons or institutions. Using prospective data from a large, multicenter study, we compare preoperative to postoperative changes in PROs between posterior, transgluteal, and anterior surgical approaches to THA.MethodsPatient-reported function, global health, and pain were systematically collected preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively from patients undergoing primary THA at 26 sites participating in the Comparative Effectiveness of Pulmonary Embolism Prevention After Hip and Knee Replacement (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02810704). Outcomes consisted of the brief Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health score, and the Numeric Pain Rating Scale. Operative approaches were grouped by surgical plane relative to the abductor musculature as being either anterior, transgluteal, or posterior.ResultsBetween 12/12/2016 and 08/31/2019, outcomes from 3018 eligible participants were examined. At 1 month, the transgluteal cohort had a 2.2-point lower improvement in Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (95% confidence interval, 0.40-4.06; P = .017) and a 1.3-point lower improvement in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Health score (95% confidence interval, 0.48-2.04; P = .002) compared to posterior approaches. There was no significant difference in improvement between anterior and posterior approaches. At 3 and 6 months, no clinically significant differences in PRO improvement were observed between groups.ConclusionPROs 6 months following THA dramatically improved regardless of the plane of surgical approach, suggesting that choice of surgical approach can be left to the discretion of surgeons and patients without fear of differential early outcomes.
| S-EPMC8218222 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is a paucity of literature examining patients' and health-care providers' perception of surgical scars after total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study examined perception of surgical scars after direct anterior (DAA) or posterior approach (PA) for THA using validated scar-assessment scales.Material and methodsSeventy-five DAA and 75 PA THA patients underwent scar assessment using the Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) and Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scales. Mean age was different between the cohorts (DAA 67 vs PA 62 years, P = .01). All patients had subcuticular running closure, secured with skin adhesive glue. Mean time from THA to scar assessment was 3.1 and 3.6 years for the DAA and PA groups, respectively (P = .18).ResultsScar opinion on the POSAS patient-reported scale was graded closer to normal skin more often for DAA than for PA patients (P = .03). More irregularities were graded for the DAA scars on the POSAS observer scale (P = .02) and the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scales (P = .04). Age did not predict scar opinion on any of the scales (P > .05). Female gender and a history of keloids predicted poorer scar appearance (P = .001 and P = .02). Overall scar appearance was rated as "good" in 93% of the DAA and 91% of the PA patients (P = .63).ConclusionDifferences exist in DAA and PA scar perception based on validated scales. Future randomized trials in scar assessment may control for confounding variables such as age and gender, as well as potential biases when using scar assessment scales.
| S-EPMC8892017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor reimbursement purposes, current coding fails to reflect the true complexity and resource utilization of hospital encounters for surgeries performed to treat periprosthetic total hip arthroplasty (THA) infection. Therefore, when compared to aseptic revisions, we sought to determine (1) Is length of stay (LOS) longer for septic surgeries? (2) Are septic procedures more expensive? and (3) How do different surgical procedures for infection compare with aseptic revisions on hospital LOS and charges?MethodsRetrospective chart review of 596 unilateral THA reoperations (473 patients) performed at a single institution (January 2015 to November 2020). Demographics, professional (ie, physicians), and technical (ie, room, implants) hospital charges per case were compared between 6 different surgery types: (1) aseptic revision (control; n = 364); (2) debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (n = 11); (3) explantation (n = 145); (4) spacer exchange (n = 7); (5) 2-stage reimplantation (n = 59); and (6) 1-stage reimplantation (n = 10).ResultsOverall, septic surgeries (n = 232) had longer LOS (mean 6.3 vs 3.3 days, P < .001) and 43% higher total charges (P < .001), vs aseptic revisions. Particularly, explantations had longer LOS (7.1 vs 3.3 days) and 56% higher total charges (both P < .001). When compared to aseptic revisions, proportional total charges for septic procedures were debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention +29%, P = .4; explantation +56%, P < .001; spacer exchange +69%, P = .008; 2-stage reimplantation +11%, P = .659; and 1-stage reimplantation +46%, P = .06.ConclusionsSome surgical procedures performed to treat periprosthetic THA infection are associated with longer LOS and significantly higher hospital charges when compared to aseptic revisions. Reimbursement adjustment is needed as current coding for septic reoperations does not reflect actual hospital resource consumption and this situation may limit access to patient care.
| S-EPMC11780107 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPercutaneous-assisted arthroplasty was introduced to minimize complications traditionally associated with minimally invasive techniques, such as component malposition and periprosthetic fracture. Proponents of percutaneous-assisted techniques have more than 15 years of clinical utilization with good outcomes. This study reports our early experience, and outcomes, with an anterior percutaneous-assisted total hip arthroplasty (AnteriorPath).MethodsA retrospective evaluation of a single-surgeon experience with the first 46 patients undergoing AnteriorPath using a cannula for acetabular cup instrumentation was compared with a similar-sized cohort undergoing traditional direct anterior (DA) total hip arthroplasty. Patients needed at least 2 postoperative visits for inclusion. Baseline preoperative characteristics, operative time, component positioning, and 6-week all-cause complications were evaluated. P values <.05 were considered statistically significant.ResultsLonger operative times were experienced with the AnteriorPath vs DA THA (93.6 minutes ± 38.6 vs 79.6 minutes ± 23.2, respectively, P = .0503). There were no significant differences in component abduction (40.14° DA vs 41.95° AnteriorPath, P = .1058). A statistically significant difference was found in component anteversion (32.8° DA vs 27.25° AnteriorPath, P = .0039). There were higher rates of short-term complications in patients undergoing DA THA (9.09% DA vs 2.5% AnteriorPath).ConclusionsEarly experience with an AnteriorPath demonstrates similar short-term outcomes compared with traditional DA THA. The use of a percutaneous technique has also allowed for a smaller incision, in-line acetabular cup reaming and impaction under direct visualization, and limited trauma to surrounding soft tissues. Further long-term studies with a larger sample size are needed to evaluate the potential benefits and complications of this novel technique.
| S-EPMC7475053 | biostudies-literature