Ansari Sajid, Singh Sanny Kumar, Regmi Anil, Goyal Tarun, Kalia Roop Bhushan, Yadav Raj Kumar, Suresh Gowda Aditya Koduvally
Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India.
Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India.
J West Afr Coll Surg. 2023 Jan-Mar;13(1):6-14. doi: 10.4103/jwas.jwas_258_22. Epub 2023 Jan 18.
The choice between posterior approach (PA) and direct lateral approach (DLA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains a contentious issue regarding clinical outcome optimization and restoring patient function. Previous studies have evaluated the postsurgical outcomes mostly in the form of Harris hip score (HHS), and the data to objectively measure the postoperative muscle power is scarce. We intend to objectively compare the hip abduction and extension strengths and other functional outcomes with a very simple tool in PA and DLA in the Indian population as most patients do not undergo as intensive rehabilitation in the postoperative period as in the western world.
A total of 158 patients underwent THA during the study period, of which 48 met inclusion criteria and only 42 completed 6 months follow-up. Patients were evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months follow-up. At each visit, muscle strength was tested using a customized sling device mounted on a pulling apparatus fitted on the wall, as well as a pain score (VAS), Harris hip score (HHS), and Short Form Survey (SF-36).
The study showed statistically significant better hip muscle strength at 2 weeks postoperative for leg press test and 2 weeks as well as 6 weeks postoperative for hip abduction strength in the PA. However, no differences were noted during the 3 or 6 months follow-up period among the DLA and PA. The surgical approach used has no effect on VAS, HHS, or SF-36 scorings.
The weak abductor mechanism at 2 and 6 weeks and extension mechanism at 2 weeks in a cohort of DLA in contrast to the PA are seen in the early postoperative period and hence are short-lived muscle weakness. However, there is no effect on VAS, HSS, and SF-36 scores. Therefore, the surgical approach is to be chosen according to the surgeon's expertise.
在全髋关节置换术(THA)中,后入路(PA)和直接外侧入路(DLA)的选择在优化临床结局和恢复患者功能方面仍然是一个有争议的问题。以往研究大多以Harris髋关节评分(HHS)的形式评估术后结局,而客观测量术后肌肉力量的数据很少。我们打算用一种非常简单的工具,客观比较印度人群中PA和DLA的髋关节外展和伸展力量以及其他功能结局,因为大多数患者在术后没有像西方患者那样接受强化康复治疗。
在研究期间,共有158例患者接受了THA,其中48例符合纳入标准,只有42例完成了6个月的随访。在术前、术后2周、6周、3个月和6个月随访时对患者进行评估。每次随访时,使用安装在墙上牵引装置上的定制吊带装置测试肌肉力量,同时记录疼痛评分(VAS)、Harris髋关节评分(HHS)和简短健康调查问卷(SF - 36)。
研究表明,PA组在术后2周进行腿部推举测试时髋关节肌肉力量在统计学上显著更好,在术后2周和6周进行髋关节外展力量测试时也显著更好。然而,在DLA组和PA组的3个月或6个月随访期间未发现差异。所采用的手术入路对VAS、HHS或SF - 36评分没有影响。
与PA组相比,DLA组在术后早期出现2周和6周时外展肌机制薄弱以及2周时伸展机制薄弱的情况,因此是短暂的肌肉无力。然而,对VAS、HSS和SF - 36评分没有影响。因此,应根据外科医生的专业技能选择手术入路。