Meta-analysis on clinical outcomes of the SuperPATH approach versus traditional approach in hip arthroplasty

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.0194

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Some clinical randomized controlled trials are trying to answer the clinical effects of SuperPATH approach and traditional approach in hip replacement, but the conclusions of present studies are different.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes between SuperPATH approach and traditional approach in hip arthroplasty.

METHODS: The randomized controlled trials about SuperPATH approach and traditional approach in hip arthroplasty published before July 2017 were searched in the PubMed, EMbase, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, and CNKI. Some published references were hand-searched. Two reviewers independently screened the literatures, extracted the data and evaluated methodological quality. Meta-analysis was conducted by Revman 5.3 software.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Eight randomized controlled trials (involving 483 cases) were involved in this analysis. The SuperPATH approach group consisted of 228 cases; the traditional approach group consisted of 255 cases. Meta-analysis results demonstrated that compared with traditional approach group, operation time was longer; incision was shorter; hip joint score was higher at postoperatively 3 months; Visual Analogue Scale scores were lower at postoperatively 1, 3 and 7 days; intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume were less in the SuperPATH approach group. No significant difference was found in postoperative complications, postoperative anteversion angle, and postoperative abduction angle, and hip score at postoperatively 1 and 6 months. These findings suggested that the total short-term effects in SuperPATH approach was better than that of traditional approach in hip arthroplasty. Long-term clinical outcomes require further investigation.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：人工关节；骨植入物；脊柱；骨折；内固定；数字化骨科；组织工程

Key words: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, Treatment Outcome, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Li Jian, Qiu Bing, Zhen Dong . Meta-analysis on clinical outcomes of the SuperPATH approach versus traditional approach in hip arthroplasty[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2018, 22(15): 2453-2460.

Figures/Tables 4

References

[1] 韦显高.髋关节置换的进展研究[J].世界最新医学信息文摘, 2016, (2):37-38.

[2] 秦啸龙,张先龙.微创全髋关节置换手术入路进展[J].国际骨科学杂志,2006,27(1):38-40.

[3] Chow J, Penenberg B, Murphy S. Modified micro-superior percutaneously-assisted total hip: early experiences & case reports. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2011;4(3):146-150.

[4] Capuano N, Del Buono A, Maffulli N. Tissue preserving total hip arthroplasty using superior capsulotomy. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2015;27(4):334-341.

[5] 周加平,吉光荣.微创人工全髋关节置换术手术入路研究现状[J].骨科临床与研究杂志,2017,2(3):186-188.

[6] Rasuli KJ, Gofton W. Percutaneously assisted total hip (PATH) and Supercapsular percutaneously assisted total hip (SuperPATH) arthroplasty: learning curves and early outcomes. Ann Transl Med. 2015;3(13):179.

[7] 何启新,乔巨峰,刘永青.SuperPath微创人工全髋关节置换术与常规全髋关节置换术早期疗效比较[J].广东医学院学报, 2016, 34(3):289-292.

[8] 黄钢勇,夏军,魏亦兵,等.Super PATH入路髋关节置换术治疗高龄老年股骨颈骨折短期临床疗效[J].国际骨科学杂志, 2016, 37(5):331-336.

[9] 吴良浩,禹宝庆,陈帆成.SuperPATH微创入路人工股骨头置换治疗老年股骨颈骨折:前瞻性?开放性?随机对照临床试验[J].中国组织工程研究,2017,21(7):1009-1014.

[10] 侯靖钊,包洪卫,程彦晓.应用SuperPATH技术行全髋关节置换的早期疗效观察[J].临床骨科杂志,2017,20(1):50-53.

[11] 佟大可,贺倩芸,刘康,等.SuperPATH入路髋关节置换术治疗股骨颈骨折的短期疗效评价[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志, 2017, 32(3):308-310.

[12] 李金泉,黄青松,徐皓,等.SuperPATH和后外侧小切口入路THA治疗股骨头缺血性坏死的近期疗效比较[J].中国骨与关节损伤杂志,2017,32(3):244-247.

[13] 蔡震海,潘界恩,黄成龙,等.SuperPath微创与常规全髋关节置换术治疗股骨颈骨折的临床疗效比较研究[J].浙江创伤外科, 2017, 22(2):343-345.

[14] 颜廷题,田少奇,王远贺,等.SuperPATH与Hardinge入路全髋关节置换术早期临床疗效比较[J].中国修复重建外科杂志, 2017, 31(1):17-24.

[15] Gofton W, Chow J, Olsen KD, et al. Thirty-day readmission rate and discharge status following total hip arthroplasty using the supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip surgical technique. Int Orthop. 2015;39(5):847-851.

[16] Cardenas-Nylander C, Bellotti V, Astarita E, et al. Innovative approach in total hip arthroplasty: supercapsular percutaneously-assisted. Hip Int. 2016;26 Suppl 1:34-37.

[17] Zhang XL, Cheng T, Zeng BF, et al. Experts' consensus on minimally invasive surgery for total joint arthroplasty. Orthop Surg. 2011;3(3):147-151.