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: a prospective randomized study.
Patients without prior hip surgery and body mass index lower than 30 undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty were eligible to participate in a r and omized prospect i ve study comparing a minimally invasive with a st and ard approach . The patients were r and omized  to receive incisions  of 8 cm ( group A , n = 28 ) or 15 cm ( group B , n = 32 ) . The groups were similar demographically . Patients in group A had significantly less intraoperative blood loss ( P < .003 ) and less total blood loss ( P < .009 ) . Fewer patients in group A limped at 6 weeks ( P < .04 ) . Operative time , transfusion requirements , narcotic usage , length of hospital stay , achievement of rehabilitation milestones , cane usage , and complications were similar in both groups . There was no difference between the groups at 1- and 2-year follow-up . Compared with a st and ard incision , patients who underwent a minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty demonstrated decreased blood loss and limped less at 6-week follow-up
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 .