The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 22, Issue 1 , Pages 48-56 , January 2007

Comparison of the 2-Incision and Mini-Incision Posterior Total Hip Arthroplasty Technique: A Retrospective Match-Pair Controlled Study

Received 14 February 2006 ,Accepted 26 September 2006.

References 

  1. Berry DJ, Berger RJ, Callaghan JJ, et al. Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: development, early results, and a critical analysis. J Bone Joint Surg. 2003;85-A:2235
  2. Sculco TP. Is smaller necessarily better?. Am J Orthop. 2003;32:169
  3. White RA, Archibech MJ. Learning curve for the minimally invasive two-incision total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:232
  4. Woolson ST, Mow CS, Syquia JF, et al. Comparison of primary total hip replacements performed with a standard incision or a mini incision. J Bone Joint Surg. 2004;86-A:2235
  5. Digioia AM, Plakeychuk AY, Levison TJ, et al. Mini-incision technique for total hip arthroplasty with navigation. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:123
  6. Hartzband MA. Posterolateral minimal incision for total hip replacement: technique and early results. Orthop Clin North Am. 2004;35:131
  7. Light TR, Keggi KJ. Anterior approach to hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop. 1980;152:255
  8. Sculco TP, Jordan LC. The mini incision approach to total hip arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect. 2004;53:141
  9. Ogonda L, Wilson R, Archbold P, et al. A minimal-incision technique in total hip arthroplasty does not improve early postoperative outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg. 2005;87-A:701
  10. Sculco TP. Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: in the affirmative. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19(4 Supp 1):78
  11. Berger RA. The technique of minimally invasive hip surgery using the two-incision approach. Instr Course Lect. 2004;53:149
  12. Berger RA, Duwelius PJ. Orthop Clin North Am. 2004;35:163
  13. Berger RA. Total hip arthroplasty using the minimally invasive two-incision approach. Clin Orthop. 2003;232
  14. Phillips CB, Barrett JA, Losina E, et al. Incidence rates of dislocation, pulmonary embolism, and deep infection during the first 6 months after elective total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:20
  15. Dorr LD. The mini incision hip: building a ship in a bottle. Orthopedics. 2004;2:192
  16. Waldman BJ. Minimally invasive total hip replacement and perioperative management: early experience. J South Orthop Assoc. 2002;25:1031
  17. Wenz JF, Gurkan L, Jibodh SR. Mini-incision total hip arthroplasty: a comparative assessment of perioperative outcomes. Orthopaedics. 2002;25:1031
  18. Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg. 1969;S1-A:737
  19. Armitage P, Berry G, Matthews JNS. In: Statistical methods in medical research. 4th ed.. Blackwell: Malden; 2002;p. 472
  20. Agency for Health Research and Quality . HCUPnet, 2002. Nationwide Inpatient Sample. http://hcup.ahrq.gov/HCUPnet.aspAccessed July 26, 2004
  21. McPherson EJ, Dorr LD, Gruen TA, et al. Hydroxyapatite-Coated Proximal Ingrowth Femoral Stems. A Match-Pair Controlled Study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. # 135:223-230.
  22. Min B, Longjohn D, Dorr LD, et al. Radiographic comparison of diaphyseal grit blasted with smooth surface stems by matched pair analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;381:
  23. Ranawat C, Beaver WB, Sharrock NE, et al. Effect of hypotensive epidural anesthesia on acetabular cement-bone fixation in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg. 1991;73-B:779
  24. Rothman RH, Hozack WJ, Ranawat A, et al. Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stems. A matched-pair analysis of coated and uncoated implants. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996;78-A:319
  25. Udomkiat P, Bei-jiang M, Dorr LD, et al. Functional comparison of posterior cruciate retention and substitution knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;378:192
  26. Udomkiat P, Dorr LD, Long W. Matched-pair analysis of all-polyethylene versus metal-backed tibial components. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16:689
  27. Salmon P, Hall GM, Peerbhoy D, et al. Recovery from hip and knee arthroplasty: patients' perspective on pain, function, and quality of life, and well-being up to 6 months postoperatively. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:380

 Level of evidence: level II-1 (retrospective matched-pair study).

 Benefits or funds were received in partial or total support of the research material described in this article from Zimmer Clinical Research Support and Royalties.

PII: S0883-5403(06)00698-X

doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.09.012

The Journal of Arthroplasty
Volume 22, Issue 1 , Pages 48-56 , January 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution