Compared with st and ard total hip replacement , mini-incision procedures may have small perioperative advantages in terms of less blood loss , shorter operative time , and shorter inpatient stay , but the differences were not clinical ly important .
Few complications were reported , and the complication rate did not differ significantly between groups .
There was insufficient evidence to suggest any major difference in the short-term revision rate , and confidence intervals for surrogate measures for long-term outcome were broad enough to include clinical ly important differences in favor of either approach .
Although there were marginal short-term advantages and disadvantages for each of the surgical techniques , there was no strong evidence either for or against mini-incision compared with st and ard-incision total hip replacement .
Importantly , evidence on longer-term performance , especially the risk of revision arthroplasty , for mini-incision hip arthroplasty is very limited
BACKGROUND Mini-incision total hip replacement continues the current trend in orthopaedics and other specialties toward smaller-incision surgery .
The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness and safety of single mini-incision compared with st and ard-incision total hip replacement for treatment of arthritis of the hip .
A lateral minimal-incision technique in total hip replacement: a prospective, randomizes, controlled trial.
Minimally invasive surgery has become a trend over the last few years in all aspects of orthopaedic surgery , including total hip arthroplasty . So-called mini-incision techniques involve limiting the length of the skin incision to 10 cm with use of either an anterior , lateral or posterior approach . Between March 2004 and December 2005 one hundred consecutive unilateral total hip replacements were performed by the same senior surgeon in our institute . All patients were r and omly assigned to study group ( group A ) or control group ( group B ) . In group A ( 50 patients ) the  skin incision was 8 cm ; in group B ( 50 patients ) the skin incision was st and ard ( about 12 - 14 cm ) . Patient demographic data , including sex , age , height , weight , BMI , diagnosis and preoperative Harris hip score were recorded . Other criteria evaluated included the perioperative and postoperative complications , the surgical time , the blood loss , the length of the incision , the acetabular and stem positions , the length of hospital stay , Harris Hip Score ( HHS ) and the WOMAC osteoarthritis index at six months . No significant differences were found between the groups with respect to the average surgical time , the acetabular and stem position , the length of hospital stay and the Harris Hip Score ( HHS ) and the WOMAC osteoarthritis index at six months . A significant lower blood loss was found in the mini-incision group . A higher percentage of peri-operative complications was recorded in Group A ( two stupor of sciatic nerve and one fracture of the greater trochanter ) . On the basis of our experience we could speculate that minimally invasive surgery should be directed to the new surgical approach with muscle sparing , instead of a shorter skin incision using st and ard approaches
Compared with st and ard total hip replacement , mini-incision procedures may have small perioperative advantages in terms of less blood loss , shorter operative time , and shorter inpatient stay , but the differences were not clinical ly important .
Few complications were reported , and the complication rate did not differ significantly between groups .
There was insufficient evidence to suggest any major difference in the short-term revision rate , and confidence intervals for surrogate measures for long-term outcome were broad enough to include clinical ly important differences in favor of either approach .
Although there were marginal short-term advantages and disadvantages for each of the surgical techniques , there was no strong evidence either for or against mini-incision compared with st and ard-incision total hip replacement .
Importantly , evidence on longer-term performance , especially the risk of revision arthroplasty , for mini-incision hip arthroplasty is very limited
BACKGROUND Mini-incision total hip replacement continues the current trend in orthopaedics and other specialties toward smaller-incision surgery .
The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness and safety of single mini-incision compared with st and ard-incision total hip replacement for treatment of arthritis of the hip .