The ilioinguinal approach (IIA) to the acetabulum has been used as a golden standard for fifty years to treat “anterior” acetabular fractures. Since its introduction by Hirvensalo and Cole, the anterior intrapelvic approach (AIPA) has been adopted by some surgeons, whilst others remain devoted to the IIA. IIA is routinely used in the Republic of Macedonia. The aim of this study is to present a review of literature for two different anterior approaches for the treatment of acetabular fractures used in modern day surgery, focussing on AIPA and its priorities and comparing it to IIA.We performed a search, mainly electronically, and retrospective analysis of existing literature. We have identified and selected two representative and well-systematized papers for IIA, and six for AIPA. We presented the advantages and disadvantages, priorities and weaknesses of both approaches separately, comparing complications, risks and results. Based on the facts presented regarding the advantages of AIPA with a focus on visualization, accessibility and biomechanical justification, the approach should be implemented in our everyday practice and we are comfortable in stating this preference, especially due to the fact that upon comparison of the complication rate there is no significant difference between the two approaches.
Corrigendum to “Delayed presentation of complex acetabular fractures: Review of literature on outcome of internal fixations with reference to extended ilio-femoral approach” [J Clin Orthop Trauma 11(6) (2020) 1082–1089]
