Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty Is Not Associated with Increased Infection Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Which approach of total hip arthroplasty is the best efficacy and least complication?

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty is as an effective intervention to relieve pain and improve hip function. Approaches of the hip have been exhaustively explored about pros and cons. The efficacy and the complications of hip approaches remains inconclusive. This study conducted an umbrella review to systematically appraise previous meta-analysis (MAs) including conventional posterior approach (PA), and minimally invasive surgeries as the lateral approach (LA), direct anterior approach (DAA), 2-incisions method, mini-lateral approach and the newest technique direct superior approach (DSA) or supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPath).

AIM

To compare the efficacy and complications of hip approaches that have been published in all MAs and randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

MAs were identified from MEDLINE and Scopus from inception until 2023. RCTs were then updated from the latest MA to September 2023. This study included studies which compared hip approaches and reported at least one outcome such as Harris Hip Score (HHS), dislocation, intra-operative fracture, wound complication, nerve injury, operative time, operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, incision length and VAS pain. Data were independently selected, extracted and assessed by two reviewers. Network MA and cluster rank and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were estimated for treatment efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

Finally, twenty-eight MAs (40 RCTs), and 13 RCTs were retrieved. In total 47 RCTs were included for reanalysis. The results of corrected covered area showed high degree (13.80%). Among 47 RCTs, most of the studies were low risk of bias in part of random process and outcome reporting, while other domains were medium to high risk of bias. DAA significantly provided higher HHS at three months than PA [pooled unstandardized mean difference (USMD): 3.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98, 6.00 with SUCRA: 85.9], followed by DSA/SuperPath (USMD: 1.57, 95%CI: -1.55, 4.69 with SUCRA: 57.6). All approaches had indifferent dislocation and intraoperative fracture rates. SUCRA comparing early functional outcome and composite complications (dislocation, intra-operative fracture, wound complication, and nerve injury) found DAA was the best approach followed by DSA/SuperPath.

CONCLUSION

DSA/SuperPath had better earlier functional outcome than PA, but still could not overcome the result of DAA. This technique might be the other preferred option with acceptable complications.

No Difference in the Rate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Patients Undergoing the Posterolateral Compared to the Direct Anterior Approach

BACKGROUND

There remains inconsistent data about the association of surgical approach and periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We sought to evaluate the risk of reoperation for superficial infection and PJI after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in a multivariate model.

METHODS

We reviewed 16,500 primary THAs, collecting data on surgical approach and all reoperations within 1 year for superficial infection (n = 36) or PJI (n = 70). Considering superficial infection and PJI separately, we used Kaplan-Meier survivorship to assess survival free from reoperation and a Cox Proportional Hazards multivariate models to assess risk factors for reoperation.

RESULTS

Between direct anterior approach (DAA) (N = 3,351) and PLA (N = 13,149) cohorts, rates of superficial infection (0.4 versus 0.2%) and PJI (0.3 versus 0.5%) were low and survivorship free from reoperation for superficial infection (99.6 versus 99.8%) and PJI (99.4 versus 99.7%) were excellent at both 1 and 2 years. The risk of developing superficial infection increased with high body mass index (BMI) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.1 per unit increase, P = .003), DAA (HR = 2.7, P = .01), and smoking status (HR = 2.9, P = .03). The risk of developing PJI increased with the high BMI (HR = 1.04, P = .03), but not surgical approach (HR = 0.68, P = .3).

CONCLUSION

In this study of 16,500 primary THAs, DAA was independently associated with an elevated risk of superficial infection reoperation compared to the PLA, but there was no association between surgical approach and PJI. An elevated patient BMI was the strongest risk factor for superficial infection and PJI in our cohort.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective cohort study.

Cement Mantle Quality and Stem Alignment in Cemented Collarless Polished Tapered Stems Implanted via the Direct Anterior and Direct Lateral Approaches: A Single Institution Experience

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the stem alignment and the quality of cement mantle of collarless polished tapered cemented stems inserted through the direct anterior approach (DAA) and the direct lateral approach (DLA).

METHODS

A comparative retrospective study of 232 hybrid total hip arthroplasties using a cemented collarless polished tapered stem through either the DAA (n = 147) or DLA (n = 85) was performed. Radiographic evaluation included stem alignment, cement mantle quality, and cement mantle thickness.

RESULTS

On anteroposterior radiographs, stems implanted through the DLA were more likely to be in neutral alignment, than those implanted through the DAA (83.5%[n = 71] versus 71.4% [n = 105]; P = <.001). No difference between approaches was noted for stem alignment on lateral radiographs or cement mantle quality. Multivariate analysis revealed factors associated with suboptimal cement mantle and included Dorr type B or C femur as well as male gender. A mean cement mantle thickness ≥2mm was achieved in all Gruen zones for both approaches.

CONCLUSION

In our series, the DAA was associated with a higher incidence of coronal plane stem malalignment compared to the DLA when using cemented tapered polished femoral components for total hip arthroplasty. No difference in lateral stem alignment or cement mantle quality was found.

Periprosthetic joint infection rates across primary total hip arthroplasty surgical approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 653,633 procedures

INTRODUCTION

Evidence demonstrates comparable clinical outcomes across the various surgical approaches to primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, high-quality contemporary data regarding periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) risk between direct anterior approach (DAA) and other (THA) approaches is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated PJI rates reported in the literature between the DAA and other approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five online databases were queried for all studies published from January 1st, 2000 through February 17th, 2021 that reported PJI rates between DAA and other surgical approaches. Studies reporting on primary THAs for osteoarthritis (OA) and that included PJI rates segregated by surgical approach were included. Articles reporting on revision THA, alternative THA etiologies, or minimally invasive techniques were excluded. Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models were utilized to evaluate the pooled effect of surgical approach on infection rates. Validated risk of bias and methodological quality assessment tools were applied to each study. Multiple sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of analyses.

RESULTS

28 articles reporting on 653,633 primary THAs were included. No differences were found between DAA cohorts and combined other approaches (OR: 0.95; 95% CI 0.74-1.21; p = 0.67) as well as segregated anterolateral approach cohorts (OR: 0.82, 95% CI 0.64-1.06; p = 0.13). However, DAA patients had a significantly reduced risk of infection compared to those undergoing posterior (OR: 0.66, 95% CI 0.58-0.74; p < 0.0001) and direct lateral (OR: 0.56, 95% CI 0.48-0.65; p < 0.00001) approaches.

CONCLUSION

The DAA to primary THA had comparable or lower PJI risk when compared to other contemporary approaches. The results of the most up-to-date evidence available serve to encourage adult reconstruction surgeons who have already adopted the DAA. Additionally, orthopaedic surgeons considering adoption or use of the direct anterior approach for other reasons should not be dissuaded over theoretical concern for a general increase in the risk of PJI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.