Comparative prospective randomized study of minimally invasive transpiriformis approach versus conventional posterolateral approach in total hip arthroplasty as measured by biology markers

Abstract

Abstract Background Minimally invasive surgery is becoming increasingly common, but evidence of the advantages of the minimally invasive transpiriformis approach in total hip arthroplasty is limited. Therefore, our single-centre randomized controlled trial evaluated the benefits of this approach versus the posterolateral approach. Methods Forty-nine patients undergoing the minimally invasive transpiriformis approach and 57 patients undergoing the posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasty were analyzed. The operative time, length of hospital stay, incision length, and peri-operative data related to the surgery were recorded. In both groups, serum CRP, IL-6, HGb, Hct, MB, CK-MB, and CK levels, Harris hip scores, and VAS scores were recorded. Results Patients who underwent the minimally invasive transpiriformis approach had a smaller surgical incision (9.10 ± 0.94 vs. 15.56 ± 1.20 cm, P = 0.00) and shorter hospital stay (6.20 ± 1.54 vs. 12.26 ± 2.97 days, P = 0.00) than those who underwent the posterolateral approach. Serum levels of CRP, IL-6, MB, CK-MB, and CK were also lower. According to the Harris hip score, the minimally invasive transpiriformis group showed significant improvement at one week and one month after surgery. Conclusion Compared to the posterolateral approach, the minimally invasive transpiriformis approach for total hip arthroplasty provided rapid functional recovery, elicited a significantly reduced post-operative inflammatory response, and caused less muscle damage.