Minimally invasive lateral approach in total hip replacement: a prospective randomised study

Abstract Purpose To compare the results of minimally invasive total hip replacement (THR) with those of conventional THR. Materials and methods This is a prospective randomized clinical study. 50 patients were selected, who were divided into 2 groups depending on the surgical approach they were subjected to, i.e. a minimally invasive direct lateral approach or a conventional direct lateral approach, with a minimum follow-up of one year. An assessment was made of perioperative bleeding, postoperative pain, time to recovery, component orientation and adjustment, rate of complications, and functional result. Results We found no significant differences between the groups as regards perioperative bleeding or postoperative pain. Recovery was significantly faster in patients subjected to minimally invasive surgery, with shorter hospital stays and earlier ambulation. No differences were detected in terms of operative time, component orientation and adjustment, complications rate or functional result. Minimally invasive surgery was also less costly, with savings of up to 4% in the total expense of the procedure. Conclusion A minimally invasive lateral approach permits a faster recovery, with a favorable economic impact and without differences in terms of any of the parameters studied.