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 .
Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty--our clinical experience.
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive prosthetic hip surgery ( MIS ) attempts to minimise the extent of the operation . The aim of the study was to describe minimally invasive hip surgery and to present early clinical experience of the authors . MATERIAL AND METHODS 41 minimally invasive hip replacements through a posterior approach were carried out at the Orthopaedic Department of the Postgraduate Medical Education Centre in Otwock between 2004 and 2006 . 29 of those patients were included into the study , of whom 23 presented for follow-up . A control group consisted of 29 r and omly selected patients operated on using the classical method . Patients qualified for MIS had a BMI below 30 and a structurally normal hip joint with a good range of motion .  RESULTS Early results were subjected to a statistical analysis of 20 parameters . CONCLUSION 1 . The analysis showed that statistically significant baseline differences between MIS and traditionally treated patients included only BMI scores , structure of the hip joint and range of motion . 2 . Implantation of a hip endoprosthesis in a MIS procedure does not differ from the traditional operation utilising a posterior access except for skin incision length
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 .