There was no major difference in the rate of complications .
Conclusions Short-term recovery favors limited incision over st and ard incision THA .
Background The literature comparing  limited incision and st and ard incision THAs  is confusing regarding whether limited incision THA improves short-term recovery without compromising long-term durability and survival .
Further , previously published meta-analyses can not conclude that limited incision THA is better .
With new data , we seek to discover if the answers now exist .
Purpose We used meta- analysis to compare surgical and hospitalization data , clinical outcomes , and complication rates , and thus ( 1 ) confirm whether limited incision THA is at least comparable to st and ard incision THA ; and ( 2 ) determine whether limited incision THA is an improvement over st and ard incision THA .
The Mini-incision Direct Lateral Approach in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty
Patients are inquiring about  mini-incision primary total hip arthroplasty  with increasing frequency . There are no published r and omized controlled trials to substantiate cl aims that the mini-incision direct lateral approach is better than a st and ard approach . The purpose of our study was to review our initial experience with the mini-incision technique through the direct lateral approach , with the intent of implementing a r and omized controlled trial if the approach could be shown as safe and effective . Of importance was determining if there is any difference in component positioning and if there is any difference in intraoperative or postoperative complications between the two groups . We retrospectively compared a consecutive series of 87 primary total hip arthroplasties . Thirty-four total hip arthroplasties were done using a mini-incision direct lateral approach . The mean abduction angle was 45 ° for both groups . The femoral stem alignment was within five degrees of neutral in 97 % of the mini group and 94 % of the st and ard group . There were no dislocations , infections , neurologic or wound complications . There were no differences in medical complications or blood transfusions . A significant decrease was found regarding body mass index , which reflects the bias in patient selection and lack of r and omization . We conclude that it is safe to continue further study with this approach because as there was no increase in complications or component malpositioning . Level of Evidence : Therapeutic study , Level III ( retrospective comparative study ) . See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence
There was no major difference in the rate of complications .
Conclusions Short-term recovery favors limited incision over st and ard incision THA .
Background The literature comparing  limited incision and st and ard incision THAs  is confusing regarding whether limited incision THA improves short-term recovery without compromising long-term durability and survival .
Further , previously published meta-analyses can not conclude that limited incision THA is better .
With new data , we seek to discover if the answers now exist .
Purpose We used meta- analysis to compare surgical and hospitalization data , clinical outcomes , and complication rates , and thus ( 1 ) confirm whether limited incision THA is at least comparable to st and ard incision THA ; and ( 2 ) determine whether limited incision THA is an improvement over st and ard incision THA .