A systematic review and meta-analysis of direct anterior approach versus posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty

Abstract

Background

This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the postoperative clinical outcomes and safety of the direct anterior approach (DAA) versus posterior approach (PA) in total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and Google databases from inception to June 2018 to select studies that compared the DAA and PA for THA. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Outcomes included Harris hip score at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 1 year; VAS at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h; incision length, operation time, postoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, and complications (intraoperative fracture, postoperative dislocation, heterotopic ossification (HO), and groin pain).

Results

Nine RCTs totaling 754 THAs (DAA group = 377, PA group = 377) met the criteria to be included in this meta-analysis. The present meta-analysis indicated that, compared with PA group, DAA group was associated with an increase of the Harris hip score at the 2-week and 4-week time points. No significant difference was found between DAA and PA groups of the Harris hip scores at 12 weeks, 1 year length of hospital stay ( p > 0.05). DAA group was associated with a reduction of the VAS at 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h with statistical significance ( p < 0.05). What is more, DAA was associated with a reduction of the incision length and postoperative blood loss ( p < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the operation time and complications (intraoperative fracture, postoperative dislocation, HO, and groin pain).

Conclusion

In THA patients, compared with PA, DAA was associated with an early functional recovery and less pain scores. What is more, DAA was associated with shorter incision length and blood loss.