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 .
Anterolateral minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled study with a follow-up of 1 year.
Anterolateral minimally invasive hip surgery ( ALMIS ) is a challenging procedure that is thought to offer a more expedient and a better functional outcome . Seventy-nine patients receiving primary hip arthroplasty were r and omized .  Röttinger ALMIS technique was used for 42 patients , whereas 41 received the st and ard lateral transgluteal Hardinge approach .  Operative time was longer with ALMIS ( P = .000078 ) , whereas blood loss was less ( P = .008 ) . Surgical and postoperative complication rates , morphine consumption , and length and cost of hospitalization were similar . At 1 year , Harris , Postel and Merle d'Aubigné , and Short Form-36v1 scores were similar . Gait analysis revealed similar results . Computed tomographic analysis revealed no significant difference in implant position , heterotopic ossification , and loosening .  Röttinger ALMIS is a valid approach for hip arthroplasty . However , it offers no advantages at 1 year
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 .