Clinical Efficacy Analysis on Total Hip Arthroplasty with Different Surgical Approaches
Download as PDF
Author(s)
Weiwei Wang, Hongkai Lian
Corresponding Author
Hongkai Lian
Abstract
Objective: To observe and analyze the clinical efficacy of total hip arthroplasty with different surgical approaches. Methods: From August 2019 to August 2020, 82 patients with total hip arthroplasty in the hospital were selected as the observation objects. Based on the numerical random table method, they were divided into two control groups: conventional group (total hip arthroplasty via posterolateral approach) and study group (total hip arthroplasty via anterolateral approach), with 41 patients in each group. Results: Although the operation time of the study group was longer than that of the conventional group, the operation incision was smaller than that of the conventional group. Also, the operation bleeding volume was lower than that of the conventional group, and the hospital time was shorter than that of the conventional group (P < 0.05). Harris hip function scores at the third, sixth and twelfth months of surgical treatment in the study group were higher than those in the conventional group (P <0.05). Surgical complications in the study group were less than those in the conventional group (P <0.05). Conclusion: Compared with the posterolateral approach, anterolateral approach to total hip arthroplasty is more minimally invasive, with many advantages such as less bleeding, faster postoperative recovery, higher safety, fewer complications, etc. It can also significantly improve the patients' hip function, which is worthy of attention in clinical practice and widespread promotion.
Keywords
Anterolateral approach, Posterolateral approach, Total hip arthroplasty, Efficacy
Acknowledgments
None
References
[1] Huang Guofu, Su Fujin, He Zhong, et al. Early Curative Effect Analysis of Minimally Invasive Direct Anterior and Posterolateral Approach in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty [J]. Sichuan Journal of Physiological Sciences, 2020, 42(03): 285- 289+305.
[2] Li Yongwang, He Rongli, Zhang Qian, et al. Comparison of Total Hip Arthroplasty between Direct Anterior Approach and Posterolateral Approach in the Aupine Position [J]. Chinese Tissue Engineering Research, 2020, 24(18): 2848-2854.
[3] Deng Chen, Ni Chaomin, Luo Zhengliang, et al. Comparative Study on the Difference between the Lateral Position of Direct Anterior Approach and Posterolateral Approach for Early Balance and Proprioception after Total Hip Arthroplasty [J]. Journal of Anhui Medical University, 2019, 54(11): 1795-1799.
[4] Jia Jian, Cheng Kai. Comparative Study on the Efficacy of Different Surgical Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty on Acetabular Dysplasia [J]. Chinese Medical Innovation, 2019, 16(23): 6-10.
[5] Zhu Ruixia, Zhao Gongyin, Wang Liangliang, et al. Comparison between Direct Anterior and Posterolateral Approach for the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fractures in Elderly Patients with Artificial Hip Arthroplasty [J]. Chinese Journal of Trauma, 2019(08): 730-735.
[6] Zhang Yuxin. Comparison of Clinical Efficacy between Direct Anterior Approach and Conventional Posterior Approach in Total Hip Arthroplasty [J]. Digest of World Latest Medical Information, 2018, 18(93): 39.
[7] Sun Baofei, Zhang Jingdong, Wang Danni, et al. Early Curative Effect Analysis of Direct Anterior Approach and Posterolateral Approach in Lateral Position in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty [J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Practical Medicine, 2017(03): 15-19.