Suppr超能文献

直接前入路与标准外侧入路行初次全髋关节置换术的比较:围手术期发现。

Comparison of primary total hip replacements performed with a direct anterior approach versus the standard lateral approach: perioperative findings.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, San Polo Hospital, via Galvani, 1, 34074 Monfalcone, GO, Italy.

出版信息

J Orthop Traumatol. 2011 Sep;12(3):123-9. doi: 10.1007/s10195-011-0144-0. Epub 2011 Jul 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Given the increasing demand for tissue-sparing surgery, the surgical approach is the subject of lively debate in total hip replacement. The aim of this paper is to compare the efficacy of the minimally invasive direct anterior approach and the standard lateral approach to total hip replacement surgery by observing intra- and perioperative outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective study on a group of 419 consecutive patients undergoing total hip replacement for coxarthrosis. The patients were divided into a first group (A) of 198 patients who had surgery with the standard lateral approach, and a second control group (B) of 221 patients who had the same procedure via the minimally invasive direct anterior approach. Assessment of the two groups considered the following perioperative parameters: length of the surgical procedure, intraoperative complications, intra- and postoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, length of stay, and type of discharge.

RESULTS

The two groups were homogeneous when compared in relation to mean age, sex and body weight. The minimally invasive direct anterior approach was performed within an acceptable time (89 ± 19 min vs. 81 ± 15 min) and with modest blood loss (3.1 ± 0.9 g/dL vs. 3,5 ± 1 g/dL). Patients experienced less pain (1.4 ± 1.5 NRS score vs. 2.5 ± 2 NRS score), and PONV affected only 5% versus 10% of cases. Times to discharge were shorter (7 ± 2 days vs. 10 ± 3.5 days), and 58.4% versus 11.6% of patients were discharged to home.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, patients treated with a minimally invasive direct anterior approach had a better perioperative outcome than patients treated with the lateral approach. The longer time of surgery for the minimally invasive direct anterior approach may be attributed to the learning curve. Further studies are necessary to investigate the advantages of a minimally invasive direct anterior approach in terms of clinical results in the short and long run.

摘要

背景

鉴于对组织保留手术需求的增加,手术入路是全髋关节置换术的热门话题。本文旨在通过观察围手术期结果,比较微创直接前侧入路和标准外侧入路全髋关节置换术的疗效。

材料与方法

作者对 419 例因髋关节骨关节炎接受全髋关节置换术的连续患者进行了回顾性研究。患者分为第一组(A 组)198 例,采用标准外侧入路手术;第二组为对照组(B 组)221 例,采用微创直接前侧入路。评估两组患者的围手术期参数包括:手术时间、术中并发症、术中及术后失血量、术后疼痛、术后恶心呕吐、住院时间和出院类型。

结果

两组患者的平均年龄、性别和体重比较差异无统计学意义。微创直接前侧入路手术时间可接受(89±19 分钟比 81±15 分钟),失血量适中(3.1±0.9g/dL 比 3.5±1g/dL)。患者疼痛较轻(1.4±1.5NRS 评分比 2.5±2NRS 评分),PONV 仅影响 5%的病例,而 10%的病例。出院时间较短(7±2 天比 10±3.5 天),58.4%的患者出院回家,而 11.6%的患者出院回家。

结论

在我们的研究中,微创直接前侧入路治疗的患者围手术期结果优于外侧入路治疗的患者。微创直接前侧入路手术时间较长可能与学习曲线有关。需要进一步研究来探讨微创直接前侧入路在短期和长期临床结果方面的优势。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8f9a/4417826/2634bbd69a73/10195_2011_144_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验