Introduction: Aim of the study is to compare clinical results and patient’s satisfaction between direct anterior approach and Hardinge approach in primary total hip arthroplasty. Methods: A group of 30 patients operated with DAA (group B) were compared to 39 patients operated by Hardinge approach (group A). Peri- and postoperative complications, Harris Hip Score (HHS), implant positioning, experienced pain and patient satisfaction were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 30 months. Results: HHS at follow-up was significantly better in group B (92.2 ± 11.9 vs 95.2 ± 4.5 p = 0.04 Student’s t test). There was no difference in femoral stem positioning while cup inclination was significantly better in group B (40.6° ± 6.6° vs 44.3° ± 7.9°, p = 0.04 Student’s t test). Overall pain recalled by patients was significantly lower in group B. Conclusion: The introduction of DAA does not affect patients’ final outcome but comes with comparable functional recovery and greater patient satisfaction.

Comparison of clinical results and patient’s satisfaction between direct anterior approach and Hardinge approach in primary total hip arthroplasty in a community hospital / C. Trevisan, R. Compagnoni, R. Klumpp. - In: MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY. - ISSN 2035-5106. - 101:3(2017), pp. 261-267. [10.1007/s12306-017-0478-8]

Comparison of clinical results and patient’s satisfaction between direct anterior approach and Hardinge approach in primary total hip arthroplasty in a community hospital

R. Compagnoni;
2017

Abstract

Introduction: Aim of the study is to compare clinical results and patient’s satisfaction between direct anterior approach and Hardinge approach in primary total hip arthroplasty. Methods: A group of 30 patients operated with DAA (group B) were compared to 39 patients operated by Hardinge approach (group A). Peri- and postoperative complications, Harris Hip Score (HHS), implant positioning, experienced pain and patient satisfaction were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 30 months. Results: HHS at follow-up was significantly better in group B (92.2 ± 11.9 vs 95.2 ± 4.5 p = 0.04 Student’s t test). There was no difference in femoral stem positioning while cup inclination was significantly better in group B (40.6° ± 6.6° vs 44.3° ± 7.9°, p = 0.04 Student’s t test). Overall pain recalled by patients was significantly lower in group B. Conclusion: The introduction of DAA does not affect patients’ final outcome but comes with comparable functional recovery and greater patient satisfaction.
Arthroplasties; Replacement; Hip surgery; Minimally invasive; Osteoarthritis; Hip prosthesis; Anterior approach
Settore MED/33 - Malattie Apparato Locomotore
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
lavoro.via.anteriore.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Post-print, accepted manuscript ecc. (versione accettata dall'editore)
Dimensione 336.86 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
336.86 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Trevisan2017_Article_ComparisonOfClinicalResultsAnd.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 365.44 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
365.44 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2434/844702
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 4
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact