Dataset Information

Supercapsular Percutaneously Assisted total hip arthroplasty versus lateral approach in Total Hip Replacement. A prospective comparative study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Supercapsular Percutaneously Assisted total hip arthroplasty (SuperPATH approach) is a relatively new minimal invasive approach which has been associated with encouraging postoperative outcomes. The aim of this study is to compare the minimal invasive (MIS) SuperPATHapproach with the standard modified Hardinge approach at the base of muscle damage due to serum markers, functional results and other perioperative and postoperative data.

Material and methods

Forty eight (48) consecutive patients undergone primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) by the same surgeon (GD), were enrolled in our study. From this study population, the modified Hardinge approach was performed in 23 patients and the SuperPATH approach was performed in 25 patients. Soft tissue impairment was studied based on three representative markers, C-reactive-protein (CRP) and two enzymes, creatine kinase (CK) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). We measured these markers 10 min after surgery, on 1st and 2nd postoperative day. The levels of the perceived pain were evaluated according to the Visual Analog Scale/Numerical Rating Scale (VAS/NRS) score which was registered 6 h, 12 h, 1 day and 2 days postoperatively. The functional and clinical evaluation of the patients was achieved with Harris Hip Score (HHS), Charnley's Hip score, EuroQol (EQ-5D)-(EQ-100), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and neuropathic pain questionnaire (DN-4) 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. The rest of the collected data included patient's age, gender, body mass index (BMI), other comorbitities, the American Society of Anesthiologists score (ASA), Charlson Index score, the pre-operative diagnosis, implant positioning through radiographic evaluation, the type of anesthesia, the days of hospitalization, the operating time, incision length, blood loss and blood transfusion requirements and complication rates.

Results

SuperPATH approach was related with statistically considerable lower levels of CRP at 10 min (p = 0,001) and at 24 h (p = 0,047) postoperatively, as well as lower LDH levels in all time points postoperatively. It was also associated with shorter incision length (p < 0.001), longer operating time (p < 0.001), higher mean cup inclination p < 0.001, decreased postoperative pain levels the first 6 and 12 h (p < 0.001) and relatively better clinical and functional results 6 months after surgery, but not at 12 months.

Conclusion

Our study revealed some advantages in favor of the SuperPATH approach comparing with the standard modified Hardinge approach, mainly in terms of less muscle damage and less perceived pain postoperatively. More research is required in order to further elucidate its efficacy.

SUBMITTER: Tottas S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7476237 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSupercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPath) arthroplasty has been proposed to be minimally invasive and tissue sparing, with possible superior postoperative outcomes compared with conventional approaches for total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, previous studies have underlined the shortcomings of conventional THA approaches, including higher dislocation, more blood loss, longer incisions, more tissue damage, and delayed postoperative rehabilitation. In the present study, we compared the short-term outcomes of unilateral THA with those of SuperPath and the mini-incision posterolateral approach (PLA) for hip osteoarthritis (OA).MethodsPatients with unilateral hip OA were prospectively recruited and underwent either SuperPath (SuperPath group) or mini-incision PLA THA (PLA group). Perioperative status [operative time, incision length, intraoperative blood loss, soft tissue damage, and length of hospital stay (LOS)], and postoperative function outcomes, including range of motion (ROM), pain visual analog scale (VAS), and Harris Hip Score (HHS), were evaluated and compared between the groups at scheduled time points within 12 months postoperatively.ResultsCompared with the PLA group, the SuperPath group yielded a significantly shorter incision length (7.83 vs. 12.45 cm, P<0.001), longer operative time (102.72 vs. 66.22 min, P<0.001), more blood loss (1,007.38 vs. 844.55 mL, P=0.005), and more soft tissue damage (creatine kinase: 1,056.05 vs. 821.50 U/L, P=0.006) on postoperative day 3. The SuperPath group also showed deficient acetabular cup positioning (abduction angle: 36.94° vs. 42.66°, P=0.004) and a greater decrease in ROM (flexion: 107.66° vs. 114.44°, P=0.004; 109.83° vs. 116.11°, P=0.002; 111.66° vs. 118.88°, P<0.001) on postoperative days 1, 3, and 14, as well as severe early-term pain symptoms (pain VAS on postoperative day 3: 7.05 vs. 6.55, P=0.041). However, the LOS, C-reactive protein levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (within 2 weeks postoperatively), and HHS were comparable between the groups during the 12 months postoperatively.ConclusionsSuperPath may be a promising, minimally invasive technique for the treatment of OA in the future. Further investigation is necessary to evidence the possible superiority of SuperPath over other conventional mini-incision THA approaches.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip arthroplasty (SuperPath) was proposed to be minimally invasive and tissue sparing with possible superior postoperative outcomes to traditional approaches of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Here, we compared the short-term outcomes of staged THA with the SuperPath or through posterolateral approach (PLA) for bilateral osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). METHODS:Patients with bilateral late-stage ONFH were prospectively recruited from our department from March 2017 to March 2018. Staged bilateral THAs with one side SuperPath and the other side PLA were performed consecutively in the same patients with right and left hips alternating within approaches. The average time interval between the staged THAs was 3?months. Perioperative status (operation time, incision length, intraoperative blood loss, soft tissue damage, and length of hospital stay) and postoperative function (range of motion, pain, and hip function) were recorded and compared between the SuperPath and PLA approaches within 12-month postoperatively. RESULTS:Four male patients (age, 51.00?±?4.54; BMI, 21.49?±?1.73) with bilateral alcohol-induced ONFH (Ficat III/IV) were followed up over 12?months postoperatively. Compared with the PLA, the SuperPath yielded shorter incision length (7.62 vs. 11.12?cm), longer operation time (103.25 vs. 66.50?min), more blood loss (1108.50 vs. 843.50?ml), deficient abduction angle of the acetabular cup (38.75° vs. 44.50°), and inferior early-term hip function (Harris hip score, 72.50 vs. 83.25) at 12-month postoperatively. Soft tissue damage, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain, postoperative range of motion, and 12-month patient satisfaction were comparable between both approaches. CONCLUSION:The SuperPath may be a minimally invasive technique but the present study shows less favorable short-term outcomes than PLA for total hip arthroplasty in osteonecrosis of the femoral head. More investigations are required to provide convincing favorable evidences of the SuperPath over other traditional THA approaches. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION:The trial was retrospectively registered in https://www.researchregistry.com (No. Researchregistry4993) on July 04, 2019. The first participant was enrolled on March 13, 2017.

Project description:BackgroundRobotic-arm assisted surgery aims to reduce manual errors and improve the accuracy of implant positioning during total hip arthroplasty. The objective of this study is to compare the accuracy of implant positioning, restoration of hip biomechanics, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and complications in conventional manual total hip arthroplasty (CO THA) versus robotic-arm assisted total hip arthroplasty (RO THA). Preoperative pelvic computerised tomography (CT) scans will be used to create patient-specific, virtual, three-dimensional reconstructions for surgical planning in both treatment groups.Methods and analysisThis prospective randomised controlled trial will include 60 patients with symptomatic hip osteoarthritis undergoing primary THA. Following informed consent, patients will be randomised to CO THA (control group) or RO THA (investigation group) at a ratio of 1:1 using an online random number generator. Observers will review patients at regular intervals for 2 years after surgery to record predefined study outcomes relating to the accuracy of implant positioning, hip biomechanics, postoperative rehabilitation, clinical progress, functional outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and complications. Primary and secondary objectives will be used to quantify and draw inferences on differences in the efficacy of treatment between the two groups. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol population analysis will be undertaken. Intention to treat relates to the allocated treatment (CO THA or RO THA), and per-protocol refers to the actual treatment received by the patient. The following statistical methods will be employed to analyse the data: descriptive statistics, independent t test, paired t test, analysis of variance, Fisher exact test, chi-square test, and graphical displays. Ethical approval was obtained from the London-Bromley Research Ethics Committee, UK. The study is sponsored by University College London, UK.DiscussionThis study compares a comprehensive and robust range of clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes in CT-planned CO THA versus CT-planned RO THA. The findings of this study will enable an improved understanding of the differences in CO THA versus RO THA with respect to patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survivorship, cost-effectiveness, and complications.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04095845 . Registered on 19 September 2019.

Project description:Computer assisted surgery was pioneered in early 1990s. The first computer assisted surgery (CAS) total knee replacement with an imageless system was carried out in 1997. In the past 25 years, CAS has progressed from experimental in vitro studies to established in vivo surgical procedures.A comprehensive body of evidence establishing the advantages of computer assisted surgery in knee and hip arthroplasty is available. Established benefits have been demonstrated including its role as an excellent research tool. Its advantages include dynamic pre-operative and per-operative assessment, increased accuracy in correction of deformities, kinematics and mechanical axis, a better alignment of components, better survival rates of prostheses and a better functional outcome. Adoption of computer navigation in the hip arthroplasty is still at an early stage compared to knee arthroplasty, though the results are well documented. Evidence suggests improved accuracy in acetabular orientation, positioning, hip offset and leg length correction.Among the orthopaedic surgeons, navigated knee arthroplasty is gaining popularity though slowly. The uptake rates vary from country to country. The Australian joint registry data shows increased navigated knee arthroplasty from 2.4% in 2003 to 28.6% in 2015 and decreased revision rates with navigated knee arthroplasty in comparison with traditional instrumented knee arthroplasty in patient cohort under the age of 55 years.Any new technology has a learning curve and with practice the navigation assisted knee and hip arthroplasty becomes easy. We have actively followed the evidence of CAS in orthopaedics and have successfully adopted it in our routine practice over the last decades. Despite the cautious inertia of orthopaedic surgeons to embrace CAS more readily; we are certain that computer technology has a pivotal role in lower limb arthroplasty. It will evolve to become a standard practice in the future in various forms like navigation or robotics.

Project description:BackgroundTotal knee arthroplasty (TKA) with mechanical alignment (MA) aims to achieve neutral limb alignment in all patients, whereas TKA with functional alignment (FA) aims to restore native, patient-specific anatomy and knee kinematics by manipulating bone resections and fine-tuning implant positioning. The objective of this study is to determine the optimal alignment technique in TKA by comparing patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, implant survivorship, complications, and cost-effectiveness in MA TKA versus FA TKA. Robotic technology will be used to execute the planned implant positioning and limb alignment with high-levels of accuracy in all study patients.Methods and analysisThis prospective double-blinded randomised control trial will include 100 patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis undergoing primary robotic arm-assisted TKA. Following informed consent, patients will be randomised to MA TKA (the control group) or FA TKA (the investigation group) at a ratio of 1:1 using an online random number generator. Blinded observers will review patients at regular intervals for 2 years after surgery to record predefined study outcomes relating to postoperative rehabilitation, clinical progress, functional outcomes, accuracy of implant positioning and limb alignment, gait, implant stability, cost-effectiveness, and complications. A superiority study design will be used to evaluate whether FA TKA provides superior outcomes compared to MA TKA. Primary and secondary objectives will be used to quantify and draw inferences on differences in the efficacy of treatment between the two groups. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol population analysis will be undertaken. The following statistical methods will be employed to analyse the data: descriptive statistics, independent t test, paired t test, analysis of variance, Fisher exact test, chi-square test, and graphical displays. Ethical approval was obtained from the London-Surrey Research Ethics Committee, UK. The study is sponsored by University College London, UK.DiscussionThis is the first study to describe the use of robotic technology to achieve FA TKA, and the only existing clinical trial comparing robotic MA TKA versus robotic FA TKA. The findings of this study will enable an improved understanding of the optimal alignment technique in TKA for achieving high-levels of patient satisfaction, improving functional outcomes, increasing implant survivorship, improving cost-effectiveness, and reducing complications.RegistrationClinical Trials.gov, NCT04092153. Registered on 17 September 2019.