A comparison of the clinical efficacy of total hip arthroplasty via direct anterior approach and posterior approach: A meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: The approach of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has long been controversial, and many studies have compared different approaches. However, there is still a lack of consistent conclusions and comprehensive, systematic comparisons and evaluations. Methods: This study retrieved 7 databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database. The search time ranged from the establishment of each database to November 1, 2023. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4, and outcome was presented as the weighed mean difference for continuous data and risk/odds ratio for dichotomous data. We used the Mantel–Haneszel method and random effects model to obtain the overall effects of the differences in the impact of 2 surgical methods on clinical outcomes in all included studies. Results: A total of 33 articles were included in this study, including 14478 participants, 4911 participants in DAA group and 9567 participants in PA group. The visual analogue scale scores of the DAA group at 1 day and 2 days after THA were significantly lower than those of the PA group (mean difference [MD] = −0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.83 to −0.30, P < .01) at 1 day and (MD = −0.67, 95% CI: −1.16 to −0.17, P = .01) at 2 days. The risk of intraoperative fracture (odds ratio = 2.18, 95% CI: 1.11–4.29, P = .05) and lateral femoral nerve injury (risk ratio = 7.84, 95% CI: 1.69–36.42, P < .01) in the DAA group was significantly higher than that of the PA group. The number of prostheses in the Lewinnek safe zone of the DAA group was significantly higher than that of the PA group (risk ratio = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.00–1.27, P = .05). The results showed no significant difference between the DAA group and the PA group in the time to stop using walking aids, dislocation rate, groin pain, incision complications, heterotopic ossification, intraoperative blood loss, and acetabular anterior (P > .05). Conclusion: Compared with the PA group, patients in the DAA group showed more ideal anatomical and imaging results, shorter hospital stay, and showing advantages in postoperative pain, but with a higher incidence of intraoperative complications.