Anterolateral intermuscular approach for type A2 intertrochanteric fractures: a cadaveric study

Protection of the innervation of the tensor fasciae latae in hip direct anterior and anterolateral approaches: a cadaver study

PURPOSE

This study aims to reveal the exact course of the superior gluteal nerve (SGN) branch innervating the tensor fascia lata (TFL) and show how it can be protected in the direct anterior approach (DAA) and anterolateral approach (ALA).

METHODS

The anterolateral regions of 22 thighs from formalin-fixed cadavers were dissected. 3 anatomical points were determined. Point A, B, C indicates where the SGN enters the gluteus minimus (GMin) fibres, the SGN leaves the gluteal muscles, the SGN enters the TFL, respectively. Measurements were made on 3 separate lines.

RESULTS

On the anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and the head of the fibula line (Line 1), the horizontal-vertical distances from point B and C to the ASIS were 7.99 ± 3.65 mm-40.40 ± 11.50 mm and 11.74 ± 6.61 mm-70.35 ± 14.11 mm respectively. The horizontal-vertical distances from point A, B, C to the greater trochanter (GT) were 32.41 ± 9.97 mm-55.28 ± 12.25 mm; 67.70 ± 8.54 mm-17.76 ± 13.57 mm; 63.92 ± 9.96 mm-13.00 ± 7.92 mm on the GT and the head of the fibula line (Line 2), respectively. The horizontal-vertical distances from point A, B, C to the GT were 24.58 ± 9.83 mm-42.54 ± 12.86 mm; 9.45 ± 7.92 mm-36.25 ± 9.06 mm; 26.18 ± 11.12 mm-64.05 ± 11.67 mm on the ASIS and the GT line (Line 3).

CONCLUSIONS

In the DAA, the increased risk of damaging the branch of the SGN that innervates the TFL must be kept in mind. The protection of this branch can be ensured with easy and applicable rules.

"Anterolateral" approach to the hip: a systematic review of the correct definition of terms

PURPOSE

The Watson-Jones interval plane between tensor fascia lata (TFL) and the gluteus medius (GM) has come back into fashion in the past few years - Röttinger described the anterolateral minimal invasive approach (ALMI) for use in total hip replacement, in which the standard Watson-Jones interval was used, but with a completely intermuscular plane. However, the term anterolateral is often still utilised to describe intramuscular approaches in which the GM was violated, thus creating a potential misunderstanding in the literature. Accordingly, we have designed a study to answer the following questions: (1) are there articles in the recent literature that use the term "anterolateral" to describe different approaches; (2) which would be the correct description of the anterolateral approach?

METHODS

We did a systematic review of the literature based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, to look for peer reviewed papers of any evidence level focusing on the definition of anterolateral approach; MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched.

RESULTS

73 manuscripts met the criteria of the systematic search. 53 papers (72.6%) reported the term anterolateral approach to describe a complete intermuscular approach between the interval between GM and TFL. Nonetheless, in the remaining 20 papers (27.4%) the term anterolateral was used to describe intramuscular approaches in which the gluteus medius was violated.

CONCLUSION

In about 1 out of 4 papers in the recent literature, the term anterolateral was utilised to describe approaches that are completely different both in terms of anatomy and function.