Orthopaedics and Trauma
Volume 23, Issue 1 , Pages 27-34, February 2009

(iv) Surgical approaches in primary total hip arthroplasty – pros and cons

CM van Dijk MD is Orthopaedic Registrar in University College Hospital London, UK

R Bimmel MD is Orthopaedic Registrar in Nij Smellinghe, Drachten, The Netherlands

Fares S Haddad BSc MCh (Orth), FRCS (Orth), is Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon in University College Hospital London, UK

Abstract 

Primary total hip arthroplasty has been one of the most successful orthopaedic procedures of the last century. Several classical surgical approaches to the hip have been described. Each approach has advantages and disadvantages. Recently, minimally invasive techniques have been developed with incisions less than 10cm. The goals of minimally invasive surgery are minimal soft tissue damage and a shorter hospital stay, faster recovery and return to work, less pain, and improved cosmetic results. The disadvantages are less visibility, longer operation time, nerve injuries, higher incidence of femoral fractures, malposition of the components and a long learning curve. The originator results with these techniques were promising. Subsequently, more controversial results have been published. Further follow-up and development is necessary to compare the results with the classical proven approaches.

Keywords: approach, hip, minimally invasive, surgical technique

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1877-1327(09)00012-8

doi:10.1016/j.mporth.2009.01.008

Orthopaedics and Trauma
Volume 23, Issue 1 , Pages 27-34, February 2009