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 .
Comparison of skin blood flow between mini- and standard-incision approaches during total hip arthroplasty.
Twenty patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty were r and omly allocated to have surgery through a mini incision of < or = 8 cm ( mini-incision surgery [ MIS ] group , n = 10 ) or a st and ard incision of 14 cm ( st and ard group , n = 10 ) . A laser Doppler flowmeter was used to measure the intraoperative blood flow of the skin . The measurements were performed at 2 regions , specifically , anterior and posterior regions across the middle points of skin incision . The measurements were taken before making the incision and after implantation . As a control , the skin blood flow over the anterior superior iliac spine was measured . After implantation , mean skin blood flows at both regions in the MIS group were significantly decreased by 32 % and 33 % . However , the corresponding flows in st and ard group and control regions were constant during operation
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 .