Surgical Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty

Vincent M Moretti, Zachary D Post, Vincent M Moretti, Zachary D Post

Abstract

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become one of the most reliable and patient-requested surgical interventions in all medicine. The procedure can be performed using a variety of surgical approaches, but the posterior approach, direct lateral approach, and direct anterior approach are by far the most common across the globe. This article highlights the history and technique for each of these common approaches. A review of outcomes and complications for each approach are also provided. Each approach has its own unique advantages and disadvantages, but all can be safely and successful utilized for THA. Strong, convincing, high-quality studies comparing the different approaches are lacking at this time. Surgeons are therefore recommended to choose whichever approach they are most comfortable and experienced using. Though not described here, THA can also be done using the anterolateral approach (also known as the Watson Jones approach) as well as the two-incision approach. In addition, recently, some surgeons are utilizing the so-called direct superior approach for THA. While these approaches are far less commonly utilized, they are recognized as viable alternatives to traditional approaches.

Keywords: Direct anterior approach; Hardinge approach; Moore approach; Orthopaedics; Smith-Petersen approach; Southern approach; Surgery; Surgical technique; arthroplasty; direct lateral approach; hip; osteotomy; posterior approach; replacement; total hip arthroplasty; transgluteal approach.

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Peroperative photographs showing (a) The pelvis is stabilized with a padded peg-board and four padded posts. (b) The PA incision starts approximately 5 cm distal to greater trochanter. (c) The fascia lata and ITB are incised longitudinally and proximally to split along the fibers of gluteus maximus. (d) Deep dissection identifies the piriformis and short external rotators (SERs). (e) Retractors maximize visualization of the acetabulum. (f) After cup placement, the leg is internally rotated, flexed, and adducted
Figure 2
Figure 2
Peroperative photographs showing (a) A bump is placed under the pelvis at the level of the anterior superior iliac spine. (b) The incision is started 2–4 cm proximal to the anterior-middle third of GT and extended distally in line with the femur to a point 4–6 cm distal to GT. (c) The anterior and posterior border of gluteus medius are identified. (d) Blunt dissection is used to split the muscle in line with its fibers. (e) The leg is placed in extreme adduction and external rotation to allow the surgeon excellent visualization of femoral version
Figure 3
Figure 3
Peroperative photographs showing (a) An arm board is placed distally on the contralateral side of the table. (b) The DA incision begins approximately 3 cm lateral and 3 cm distal to ASIS. (c) The fascia overlying TFL is incised longitudinally in line with the muscle's fibers. (d) Blunt retractors are placed intracapsular around the femoral. (e) Extraction of the “napkin ring” formed by the double osteotomy allows for removal of the femoral head with a corkscrew. (f) Acetabular exposure is accomplished with three or four retractors: Lighted retractor on the anterior acetabular rim, blunt curved retractor placed just distal to the transverse acetabular ligament, and sharp Hohman placed behind the posterolateral acetabular rim. (g) A hook is placed from lateral to medial just distal to GT. This is attached to a sterile arm that applies tension to the femur during capsular release (h) Femoral preparation and broaching using offset handles

References

    1. Felson DT, Lawrence RC, Dieppe PA, Hirsch R, Helmick CG, Jordan JM, et al. Osteoarthritis: New insights. Part 1: The disease and its risk factors. Ann Intern Med. 2000;133:635–46.
    1. Guccione AA, Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Anthony JM, Zhang Y, Wilson PW, et al. The effects of specific medical conditions on the functional limitations of elders in the Framingham Study. Am J Public Health. 1994;84:351–8.
    1. Jordan JM, Helmick CG, Renner JB, Luta G, Dragomir AD, Woodard J, et al. Prevalence of hip symptoms and radiographic and symptomatic hip osteoarthritis in African Americans and Caucasians: The Johnston County Osteoarthritis Project. J Rheumatol. 2009;36:809–15.
    1. Lawrence RC, Felson DT, Helmick CG, Arnold LM, Choi H, Deyo RA, et al. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part II. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:26–35.
    1. Hootman JM, Helmick CG. Projections of US prevalence of arthritis and associated activity limitations. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54:226–9.
    1. Morrey BF. A historical perspective of hip arthroplasty and reconstructive surgery. In: Cashman J, Goyal N, Parvizi J, editors. The Hip: Preservation, Replacement and Revision. Brooklandville, MD: Data Trace Publishing Company; 2015. pp. 1.1–1.19.
    1. Charnley J. Total hip replacement by low-friction arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1970;72:7–21.
    1. Maradit Kremers H, Larson DR, Crowson CS, Kremers WK, Washington RE, Steiner CA, et al. Prevalence of total hip and knee replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:1386–97.
    1. “Inpatient Surgery”. FastStats. National Center for Health Statistics. Centers for Disease Control and\Prevention. [Last accessed on 2016 Jun 26]. Available from: .
    1. Kurtz S, Mowat F, Ong K, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern M. Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1487–97.
    1. Singh JA. Epidemiology of knee and hip arthroplasty: A systematic review. Open Orthop J. 2011;5:80–5.
    1. von Langenbeck B. Uber die schussverletzungen des huftgelenks. Arch Klin Chir. 1874;16:263.
    1. Moore AT. The self-locking metal hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1957;39-A:811–27.
    1. Chechik O, Khashan M, Lador R, Salai M, Amar E. Surgical approach and prosthesis fixation in hip arthroplasty world wide. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133:1595–600.
    1. McFarland B, Osborne G. Approach to the hip: A suggested improvement on Kocher's method. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1954;36B:364–7.
    1. Hardinge K. The direct lateral approach to the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1982;64:17–9.
    1. Jacobs LG, Buxton RA. The course of the superior gluteal nerve in the lateral approach to the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71:1239–43.
    1. Smith-Petersen MN. A new supra-articular subperiosteal approach to the hip joint. Am J Orthop Surg. 1917;15:592–5.
    1. Smith-Petersen MN. Approach to and exposure of the hip joint for mold arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1949;31A:40–6.
    1. Mancuso CA, Salvati EA, Johanson NA, Peterson MG, Charlson ME. Patients’ expectations and satisfaction with total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1997;12:387–96.
    1. Specht K, Kjaersgaard-Andersen P, Kehlet H, Wedderkopp N, Pedersen BD. High patient satisfaction in 445 patients who underwent fast-track hip or knee replacement. Acta Orthop. 2015;86:702–7.
    1. Naal FD, Impellizzeri FM, Lenze U, Wellauer V, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Leunig M. Clinical improvement and satisfaction after total joint replacement: A prospective 12-month evaluation on the patients’ perspective. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:2917–25.
    1. Restrepo C, Parvizi J, Pour AE, Hozack WJ. Prospective randomized study of two surgical approaches for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:671–9.e1.
    1. Barrett WP, Turner SE, Leopold JP. Prospective randomized study of direct anterior vs. postero-lateral approach for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28:1634–8.
    1. Barber TC, Roger DJ, Goodman SB, Schurman DJ. Early outcome of total hip arthroplasty using the direct lateral vs. the posterior surgical approach. Orthopedics. 1996;19:873–5.
    1. Witzleb WC, Stephan L, Krummenauer F, Neuke A, Günther KP. Short-term outcome after posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty – A randomized clinical trial. Eur J Med Res. 2009;14:256–63.
    1. Martin CT, Pugely AJ, Gao Y, Clark CR. A comparison of hospital length of stay and short-term morbidity between the anterior and the posterior approaches to total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28:849–54.
    1. Parvizi J, Restrepo C, Maltenfort MG. Total hip arthroplasty performed through direct anterior approach provides superior early outcome: Results of a randomized, prospective study. Orthop Clin North Am. 2016;47:497–504.
    1. Phillips CB, Barrett JA, Losina E, Mahomed NN, Lingard EA, Guadagnoli E, et al. Incidence rates of dislocation, pulmonary embolism, and deep infection during the first six months after elective total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:20–6.
    1. Pulido L, Ghanem E, Joshi A, Purtill JJ, Parvizi J. Periprosthetic joint infection: The incidence, timing, and predisposing factors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:1710–5.
    1. Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y, Schweizer ML, Callaghan JJ. The incidence of and risk factors for 30-day surgical site infections following primary and revision total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(9 Suppl):47–50.
    1. Malek IA, Royce G, Bhatti SU, Whittaker JP, Phillips SP, Wilson IR, et al. A comparison between the direct anterior and posterior approaches for total hip arthroplasty: The role of an ‘Enhanced Recovery’ pathway. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B:754–60.
    1. Namba RS, Inacio MC, Paxton EW. Risk factors associated with surgical site infection in 30,491 primary total hip replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:1330–8.
    1. Sheth D, Cafri G, Inacio MC, Paxton EW, Namba RS. Anterior and anterolateral approaches for THA are associated with lower dislocation risk without higher revision risk. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473:3401–8.
    1. Christensen CP, Karthikeyan T, Jacobs CA. Greater prevalence of wound complications requiring reoperation with direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:1839–41.
    1. Siguier T, Siguier M, Brumpt B. Mini-incision anterior approach does not increase dislocation rate: A study of 1037 total hip replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;426:164–73.
    1. Matta JM, Shahrdar C, Ferguson T. Single-incision anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty on an orthopaedic table. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;441:115–24.
    1. Mulliken BD, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, Nayak N. A modified direct lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: A comprehensive review. J Arthroplasty. 1998;13:737–47.
    1. Demos HA, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, MacDonald SJ, McCalden RW. Instability in primary total hip arthroplasty with the direct lateral approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;393:168–80.
    1. Goldstein WM, Gleason TF, Kopplin M, Branson JJ. Prevalence of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty through a posterolateral approach with partial capsulotomy and capsulorrhaphy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A(Suppl 2(Pt 1)):2–7.
    1. White RE, Jr, Forness TJ, Allman JK, Junick DW. Effect of posterior capsular repair on early dislocation in primary total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;393:163–7.
    1. Sierra RJ, Raposo JM, Trousdale RT, Cabanela ME. Dislocation of primary THA done through a posterolateral approach in the elderly. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;441:262–7.
    1. Tripuraneni KR, Munson NR, Archibeck MJ, Carothers JT. Acetabular abduction and dislocations in direct anterior vs. posterior total hip arthroplasty: A retrospective, matched cohort study. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31:2299–302.
    1. Kumar V, Sharma S, James J, Hodgkinson JP, Hemmady MV. Total hip replacement through a posterior approach using a 22 mm diameter femoral head: The role of the transverse acetabular ligament and capsular repair in reducing the rate of dislocation. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B:1202–6.
    1. Khan RJ, Yao F, Li M, Nivbrant B, Wood D. Capsular-enhanced repair of the short external rotators after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:840–3.
    1. Berry DJ, von Knoch M, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS. Effect of femoral head diameter and operative approach on risk of dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2456–63.
    1. Higgins BT, Barlow DR, Heagerty NE, Lin TJ. Anterior vs. posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty, a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30:419–34.
    1. Kwon MS, Kuskowski M, Mulhall KJ, Macaulay W, Brown TE, Saleh KJ. Does surgical approach affect total hip arthroplasty dislocation rates? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;447:34–8.
    1. Masonis JL, Bourne RB. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Dec;(405):46–53.
    1. Tsukada S, Wakui M. Lower dislocation rate following total hip arthroplasty via direct anterior approach than via posterior approach: Five-year-average follow-up results. Open Orthop J. 2015;9:157–62.
    1. Jolles BM, Bogoch ER. Posterior versus lateral surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults with osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;1:CD003828.
    1. Maratt JD, Gagnier JJ, Butler PD, Hallstrom BR, Urquhart AG, Roberts KC. No difference in dislocation seen in anterior vs. posterior approach total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(9 Suppl):127–30.
    1. Jewett BA, Collis DK. High complication rate with anterior total hip arthroplasties on a fracture table. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:503–7.
    1. Woolson ST, Pouliot MA, Huddleston JI. Primary total hip arthroplasty using an anterior approach and a fracture table: Short-term results from a community hospital. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:999–1005.
    1. Nakata K, Nishikawa M, Yamamoto K, Hirota S, Yoshikawa H. A clinical comparative study of the direct anterior with mini-posterior approach: Two consecutive series. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:698–704.
    1. Hendel D, Yasin M, Garti A, Weisbort M, Beloosesky Y. Fracture of the greater trochanter during hip replacement: A retrospective analysis of 21/372 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002;73:295–7.
    1. Howell GE, Biggs RE, Bourne RB. Prevalence of abductor mechanism tears of the hips in patients with osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16:121–3.
    1. Hendry J, Biant LC, Breusch SJ. Abductor mechanism tears in primary total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012;132:1619–23.
    1. Miozzari HH, Dora C, Clark JM, Nötzli HP. Late repair of abductor avulsion after the transgluteal approach for hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:450–7.e1.
    1. Bergin PF, Doppelt JD, Kephart CJ, Benke MT, Graeter JH, Holmes AS, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive direct anterior versus posterior total hip arthroplasty based on inflammation and muscle damage markers. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:1392–8.
    1. Meneghini RM, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Hozack WJ. Muscle damage during MIS total hip arthroplasty: Smith-Petersen versus posterior approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;453:293–8.
    1. Macheras GA, Christofilopoulos P, Lepetsos P, Leonidou AO, Anastasopoulos PP, Galanakos SP. Nerve injuries in total hip arthroplasty with a mini invasive anterior approach. Hip Int. 2016;26:338–43.
    1. Goulding K, Beaulé PE, Kim PR, Fazekas A. Incidence of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve neuropraxia after anterior approach hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:2397–404.
    1. Bhargava T, Goytia RN, Jones LC, Hungerford MW. Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve impairment after direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2010;33:472.
    1. Khan T, Knowles D. Damage to the superior gluteal nerve during the direct lateral approach to the hip: A cadaveric study. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:1198–200.
    1. Picado CH, Garcia FL, Marques W., Jr Damage to the superior gluteal nerve after direct lateral approach to the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;455:209–11.
    1. Oldenburg M, Müller RT. The frequency, prognosis and significance of nerve injuries in total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 1997;21:1–3.
    1. Ramesh M, O’Byrne JM, McCarthy N, Jarvis A, Mahalingham K, Cashman WF. Damage to the superior gluteal nerve after the Hardinge approach to the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:903–6.
    1. Farrell CM, Springer BD, Haidukewych GJ, Morrey BF. Motor nerve palsy following primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2619–25.
    1. Simmons C, Jr, Izant TH, Rothman RH, Booth RE, Jr, Balderston RA. Femoral neuropathy following total hip arthroplasty. Anatomic study, case reports, and literature review. J Arthroplasty. 1991;6(Suppl):S57–66.
    1. Schmalzried TP, Amstutz HC, Dorey FJ. Nerve palsy associated with total hip replacement. Risk factors and prognosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991;73:1074–80.
    1. Basad E, Ishaque B, Stürz H, Jerosch J. The anterolateral minimally invasive approach for total hip arthroplasty: Technique, pitfalls, and way out. Orthop Clin North Am. 2009;40:473–8, viii.
    1. Pflüger G, Junk-Jantsch S, Schöll V. Minimally invasive total hip replacement via the anterolateral approach in the supine position. Int Orthop. 2007;31(Suppl 1):S7–11.
    1. Berger RA. Total hip arthroplasty using the minimally invasive two-incision approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;(417):232–41.
    1. Berger RA, Duwelius PJ. The two-incision minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: Technique and results. Orthop Clin North Am. 2004;35:163–72.
    1. Leunig M, Faas M, von Knoch F, Naal FD. Skin crease ‘bikini’ incision for anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: Surgical technique and preliminary results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:2245–52.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅