Outcomes Following Anterior Approach to Total Hip Arthroplasty (AAP)

August 12, 2014 updated by: McMaster University

Outcomes Following Anterior Approach to Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Multi-Centre Observational Cohort Study

Osteoarthritis disables approximately 10% of people who are 60 years or older and compromises the quality of life of more than 20 million Americans every year. Osteoarthritis is caused by the breakdown of cartilage that lines the bones at your joints from daily wear and tear and results in pain and restricted function. Total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total hip replacement, is currently one of the most successful and cost-effective treatments used to eliminate pain and restore function in those suffering from osteoarthritis. There are multiple ways to perform a THA. The main difference between each type is the point of incision in relation to a muscle on the outer surface of your hip bone: gluteus medius. The incision performed can be anterior (in front of the muscle), anterolateral (in front and to the side of the muscle), or posterior (from the back). Each of these approaches has its own advantages and disadvantages, but there is no evidence available that makes one better than the other. The purpose of this study is to determine which of the three approaches to THA is the most effective. The main outcome that will determine the most effective approach is the functional ability of the patients included in this study at 52 weeks. The investigators will also compare whether the patient's: length of hospital stay, use of assistive devices, need for revision surgery, ability to return to work, ability to relieve pain, complication rate, and quality of life. The investigators hypothesize that the anterior approach will be the most effective approach in reducing the rate of post-operative complications after THA.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Terminated

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
50

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Canada
    • Ontario
      • Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8L 8E7
        • McMaster University

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Men or women who are 18 years of age or older with a primary diagnosis of hip arthritis (radiographically and clinically). Patients must be undergoing an unilateral THA and have had no previous major hip surgery (hip arthroscopy is permitted) or hardware implanted in their hip.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Men or women who are 18 years of age or older.
  2. Primary diagnosis of hip arthritis (radiographically and clinically).
  3. Patients undergoing an unilateral THA.
  4. Provision of informed consent by patient.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients being managed with alternative approaches (other than anterior, anterolateral or posterior THA) will be excluded.
  2. Patients undergoing a revision THA.
  3. Patients undergoing a bilateral THA.
  4. Patients with infection around the hip (soft tissue or bone).
  5. Patients who have had previous major hip surgery (hip arthroscopy is permitted) or hardware implanted in their hip.
  6. Patients who are currently enrolled in another surgical intervention trial.
  7. Patient has cognitive or language barriers that would limit completion of quality of life, pain, and function questionnaires in English.
  8. Anticipated problems, in the judgment of the investigators, with maintaining follow-up. We will, for example, exclude patients with no fixed address, those who report a plan to move out of town in the next year, or intellectually challenged patients without adequate family support.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
Anterior Approach THA
500 Patients will be included who have received a total hip arthroplasty using the Anterior Approach. The anterior approach to total hip arthroplasty refers to an internervous approach to the hip, where the incision is made from the middle of the iliac crest, then curved distally and laterally to the anterior superior iliac spine (Kelmanovich et al., 2003). To optimize feasibility and applicability of our results, we will not standardize the use of cemented components, the implant manufacturer, or the femoral head size. Surgeons will use the manufacturer specific guides for insertion of the total hip arthroplasty.
Posterior Approach THA
100 patients will be enrolled who have received a total hip arthroplasty using the posterior approach. The posterior approach is performed by making a curved incision posteriorly on the greater trochanter (Jolles & Bogoch, 2004). The fascia lata is then incised and the fibers of the gluteus maximus split using dissection (Jolles & Bogoch, 2004). To ensure the feasibility and applicability of our findings, we will not standardize the use of cemented components, the implant manufacturer, or the femoral head size used in the posterior approach.
Anterolateral Approach THA
100 patients will be enrolled who have had a total hip arthroplasty using the anterolateral approach. An anterolateral approach to THA utilizes an intermuscular approach by incising the patient posteriorly and distally to the anterior superior iliac spine, extending distally to the greater trochanter along the shaft of the femur (Kelmanovich et al., 2003). To optimize the feasibility and applicability of our results, the implant manufacturer, femoral head size or the use of cemented components will not be standardized in this study.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Patient Functional Ability
Time Frame: 52 Weeks
Measured by the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) questionnaire.
52 Weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Technical Parameters
Time Frame: 1 day - measured during and post-operatively
Length of Incision (cm), Blood Loss (mL), Fluoroscopy Time (s), Operative Time (Min)
1 day - measured during and post-operatively
Length of Hospital Stay
Time Frame: 4 weeks
Duration of time patient is in hospital post-operatively.
4 weeks
Use of Assistive Device
Time Frame: 52 weeks
Presence of an assistive device(s) provided to patients at discharge and the length of time it takes the patient to discard the assistive device(s).
52 weeks
Revision Surgery
Time Frame: 52 weeks
Occurrence and type of revision surgery required (if any)
52 weeks
Ability to participate in sports activities
Time Frame: 52 weeks
Subjectively reported.
52 weeks
Return to Work
Time Frame: 52 Weeks
Measured by the Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ)- short form format
52 Weeks
Complication Rate
Time Frame: 52 Weeks
We will define complications in patients as a constellation of clinical symptoms and laboratory examinations. These will include (but are not limited to) both intraoperative and postoperative complications; More specifically, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, psychological, neurological, genitourinary, and wound-related complications.
52 Weeks
Pain
Time Frame: 52 Weeks
Measured by the EuroQol-5d (EQ-5D) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) questionnaires.
52 Weeks
Quality of Life
Time Frame: 52 Weeks
Measured by the EuroQol-5d (EQ-5D) and Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) questionnaires.
52 Weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
McMaster University

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
DePuy Orthopaedics

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Mohit Bhandari, MD, PhD, FRCSC, McMaster University
  • Principal Investigator: Joel Matta, MD, St. Joseph's Health Centre

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
February 1, 2013

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
October 1, 2013

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
October 1, 2013

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
May 11, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
May 12, 2011

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
May 16, 2011

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
August 13, 2014

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 12, 2014

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
August 1, 2014

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • Depuy-05072

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings