From the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital Universitario Mayor Méderi and Instituto Roosevelt (E. Huerfano), the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Universidad del Rosario (Bautista), the Department of Nephrology, Hospital Universitario Mayor Méderi (M. Huerfano), and the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Fundación Cardioinfantil, Clinica del Country and Instituto Roosevelt (Nossa), Bogotá, Colombia.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2021 Nov 15;29(22):e1126-e1140. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-20-00861.
Posterolateral approach (PA) has been historically associated with an increased risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), especially when compared with the direct anterior approach (DAA). However, current evidence is inconsistent regarding the risk of dislocation with either approach. The purpose of this study is to determine whether surgical approach influences joint stability.
A systematic search in PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs comparing DAA with PA in primary THA were included. Pooled effect measure of risk differences, relative risk and mean differences for postoperative dislocation, acetabular implant positioning, and leg length discrepancy were calculated.
Twenty-five studies (5 RCTs and 20 non-RCTs) of 7,172 THAs were assessed. There were no significant differences in dislocation rates between approaches (risk difference = -0.00, 95% confidence interval: -0.01 to 0.00; P = 0.92; I2 = 0%). Results were similar in the subgroup analysis of RCTs (P = 0.98), posterior soft-tissue repair (P = 0.50), and learning curve (P = 0.77). The acetabular implant was better positioned within the safe zone in the DAA group (relative risk = 1.17; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 1.33; P = 0.01), but no significant differences were found in cup inclination (P = 0.8), anteversion (P = 0.10), and leg length discrepancy (P = 0.54).
Dislocation rates after THA are not different between DAA and PA. Furthermore, no differences in the rate of dislocation were associated with cup positioning or surgical factors related with hip instability. Therefore, the surgical approach has little influence in prosthesis instability after primary THA.
Level III.
后路入路(PA)在初次全髋关节置换术(THA)后脱位的风险一直高于传统的直接前入路(DAA),尤其是与直接前入路相比。然而,目前关于任何一种方法的脱位风险的证据并不一致。本研究旨在确定手术入路是否会影响关节稳定性。
对 PubMed、MEDLINE 和 Embase 数据库进行系统检索。纳入比较初次 THA 中 DAA 与 PA 的随机对照试验(RCT)和非 RCT。计算术后脱位、髋臼植入物位置和下肢长度差异的风险差异、相对风险和均值差异的合并效应测量值。
评估了 7172 例 THA 的 25 项研究(5 项 RCT 和 20 项非 RCT)。两种方法的脱位率无显著差异(风险差异=-0.00,95%置信区间:-0.01 至 0.00;P=0.92;I2=0%)。RCT 亚组分析(P=0.98)、后软组织修复(P=0.50)和学习曲线(P=0.77)的结果也相似。DAA 组髋臼植入物在安全区域内的位置更好(相对风险=1.17;95%置信区间:1.03 至 1.33;P=0.01),但杯倾斜度(P=0.8)、前倾角(P=0.10)和下肢长度差异(P=0.54)无显著差异。
DAA 和 PA 后 THA 的脱位率无差异。此外,与髋关节不稳定相关的杯状位置或手术因素与脱位率无差异。因此,手术入路对初次 THA 后假体不稳定的影响较小。
III 级。