A Prospective Randomized Trial of Mini-incision Posterior and Two-incision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background The two-incision approach to THA has been controversial, with some authors reporting its use is associated with a rapid recovery whereas others report no differences in outcomes and a higher risk of perioperative complications secondary to increased surgical complexity.

Questions/purposes We therefore compared early postoperative variables including pain, length of stay, functional recovery, complications, and complexity of the mini-posterior and two-incision approaches to THA.

Patients and Methods We prospectively enrolled 72 patients scheduled for THA and randomized them into two groups: mini-incision posterior approach and the two-incision approach. Preoperative teaching, anesthetic protocols, implants used, and rehabilitation pathways were identical for both groups. All variables were assessed at a maximum of 1 year postoperatively.

Results All key outcomes were similar in the two groups: mean visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain during the first 3 postoperative days and the first 6 weeks, total narcotic requirements in the hospital and during the first 6 weeks, mean length of stay (51 hours versus 48 hours), and mean Harris hip scores and SF-12 scores. Achievement of functional milestones was similar between the two groups. There was one reoperation in each group. Mean operative time was longer for patients in the two-incision group (98 minutes versus 77 minutes), however the accuracy of component positioning was similar.

Conclusions We found no differences in perioperative outcomes between these two approaches for THA. Variables other than the surgical approach including perioperative protocols, patient expectations, and the patient’s general health may have a greater effect on outcomes such as pain during the early postoperative period, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay. The use of small incisions for THA was safe as was a shortened hospital stay in selected patients.

Level of Evidence Level I, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.