A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the SuperPATH Approach in Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract

Objective. To compare the clinical and radiographic results of the supercapsular percutaneously assisted total hip (SuperPATH) approach and the conventional approach in hip arthroplasty. Design. Based on a prepublished protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42020177717), we searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for relevant literatures up to January 30, 2021. The methodological qualities were assessed using the guidelines provided by the Cochrane Collaboration for Systematic Reviews. Randomized- or fixed-effect models were used to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD) or odds ratio (OR), respectively, for continuous and dichotomous variables. Results. 6 articles were included in the study, and 526 patients were selected, which included 233 cases in the SuperPATH groups and 279 cases in the conventional groups, and 4 cases performed two surgeries in succession. The SuperPATH group demonstrated shorter incision length ( $\text{WMD}=-7.87$ , 95% CI (−10.05, −5.69), $P<0.00001$ ), decreased blood transfusion rate ( $\text{OR}=0.48$ , 95% CI (0.25, 0.89), $P=0.02$ ), decreased visual analogue scale (VAS) ( $\text{WMD}=-0.40$ , 95% CI (−0.72, −0.08), $P=0.02$ ), and higher Harris hip score (HHS) ( $\text{WMD}=1.98$ , 95% CI (0.18, 3.77), $P=0.03$ ) than the conventional group. However, there was no difference in VAS ( $P=0.14$ ) and HHS ( $P=0.86$ ) between the two groups 3 months later, nor in the acetabular abduction angle ( $P=0.32$ ) in either group. Conclusions. SuperPATH, as a minimally invasive approach with its reduced tissue damage, quick postoperative recovery, and early rehabilitation, demonstrates the short-term advantages of hip arthroplasty. As the evidences in favor of the SuperPATH technique were limited in a small number of studies and short duration of follow-up, more research is required to further analyze its long-term effect.