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 .
[Minimally invasive vs. transgluteal total hip replacement. A 3-month follow-up of a prospective randomized clinical study].
BACKGROUND The aim of this prospect i ve r and omized study was to compare the results after total hip replacement ( THR ) using an MIS approach  versus a regular transgluteal approach ( Bauer approach ) . METHOD We compared 20 THRs using a modified Watson-Jones minimally invasive approach ( MIS group ) with 20 conventionally performed THRs using a Bauer approach ( control group ) .  In all cases , the same implants ( Trilogy cup , MAYO stem ) were used . The Harris Hip Score ( HHS ) , the visual analogue scale , myoglobin level , and creatinine kinase level were measured preoperatively and up to 3 months postoperatively . RESULTS Advantages of the MIS group were evaluated using the HHS in the categories of activity and range of motion 6 weeks postoperatively . In terms of function , gait , and total HHS , we found benefits in the MIS group 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively . Up to 48 h postoperatively , patients in the MIS group had lower myoglobin blood levels . No differences were found in creatinine kinase levels , pain sensation as measured by visual analogue scale , or implant positioning . CONCLUSION Use of the minimally invasive Watson-Jones approach shows advantages compared with the transgluteal Bauer approach 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively . Up to now there has been no prospect i ve r and omized clinical study that has definitely shown the superiority of the minimally invasive procedure . For that reason , the conventional approaches in THR are still the gold st and ard
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 .