scholarly journals Surgical approach for fracture of distal humerus: Posterior vs lateral

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michela Saracco ◽  
Alessandro Smimmo ◽  
Davide De Marco ◽  
Osvaldo Palmacci ◽  
Giuseppe Malerba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Radial Nerve ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Age Distribution ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Humeral Fractures ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Complication Rates

Humeral fractures have an incidence of 3-5% and a bimodal age distribution. They may occur in young patients after highenergy traumas or in elderly osteoporotic patients after low-energy injuries. In nondisplaced fractures or in elderly patients, humeral fractures are treated by conservative methods. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) should be the treatment of choice in case of multi-fragmentary fractures associated with radial nerve palsy or not. ORIF is usually regarded as the gold standard treatment, but, depending on the different types of fracture, the surgical approach can change. In this review, we compare results and complication rates between lateral and posterior surgical approaches in the management of extraarticular distal humeral shaft fractures. An internet-based literature research was performed on Pubmed, Google Scholars and Cochrane Library. 265 patients were enrolled: 148 were treated by lateral or antero-lateral approach, while 117 by posterior or postero-lateral approach. The literature shows that no differences between the posterior and lateral approach exist. Certainly, the posterior approach offers undoubted advantages in terms of exposure of the fracture and visualization of the radial nerve. In our opinion, the posterior approach may also allow better management of complex and multi-fragmentary fractures.

Surgical approach significantly affects the complication rates associated with total hip arthroplasty

2019 ◽  
Vol 101-B (6) ◽  
pp. 646-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. K. Aggarwal ◽  
A. Elbuluk ◽  
J. Dundon ◽  
C. Herrero ◽  
C. Hernandez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Periprosthetic Fracture ◽  
Anterior Approach ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Deep Infection ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Wound Drainage

Aims A variety of surgical approaches are used for total hip arthroplasty (THA), all with reported advantages and disadvantages. A number of common complications can occur following THA regardless of the approach used. The purpose of this study was to compare five commonly used surgical approaches with respect to the incidence of surgery-related complications. Patients and Methods The electronic medical records of all patients who underwent primary elective THA at a single large-volume arthroplasty centre, between 2011 and 2016, with at least two years of follow-up, were reviewed. After exclusion, 3574 consecutive patients were included in the study. There were 1571 men (44.0%) and 2003 women (56.0%). Their mean age and body mass index (BMI) was 63.0 years (sd 11.8) and 29.1 kg/m2 (sd 6.1), respectively. Data gathered included the age of the patient, BMI, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), operating time, the presence of intra- or postoperative complications, type of complication, and the surgical approach. The approaches used during the study were posterior, anterior, direct lateral, anterolateral, and the northern approach. The complications that were recorded included prolonged wound drainage without infection, superficial infection, deep infection, dislocation, aseptic loosening, and periprosthetic fracture. Finally, the need for re-operation was recorded. Means were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Student’s t-tests where appropriate and proportions were compared using the chi-squared test. Results A total of 248 patients had 263 complications related to the surgery, with an incidence of 6.94%. The anterior approach had the highest incidence of complications (8.5% (113/1329)) and the posterior approach had the lowest, at 5.85% (97/1657; p = 0.006). Most complications were due to deep infection (22.8%), periprosthetic fracture (22.4%), and prolonged wound drainage (21.3%). The rate of dislocation was 0.84% (14/1657) with the posterior approach and 1.28% (17/1329) with the anterior approach (p = 0.32). Conclusion Overall, THA has a relatively low complication rate. However, the surgical approach plays a role in the incidence of complications. We found that the posterior approach had a significantly lower overall complication rate compared with the anterior approach, with an equal dislocation rate. Periprosthetic fracture and surgical site infection contributed most to the early complication rates. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:646–651

scholarly journals Surgical management of spinal meningiomas: focus on unilateral posterior approach and anterior localization

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 308-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Onken ◽  
Kathrin Obermüller ◽  
Franziska Staub-Bartelt ◽  
Bernhard Meyer ◽  
Peter Vajkoczy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Surgical Complication ◽  
Extent Of Resection ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Spinal Meningiomas

OBJECTIVESpinal meningiomas (sMNGs) are relatively rare in comparison to intracranial MNGs. sMNGs localized anterior to the denticulate ligament (aMNGs) represent a surgically challenging subgroup. A high perioperative complication rate due to the need for complex surgical approaches has been described. In the present study, the authors report on their surgical experience that involves two institutions in which 207 patients underwent surgery for sMNGs. Special focus was placed on patients with aMNGs that were treated via a unilateral posterior approach (ULPA).METHODSBetween 2005 and 2017, 207 patients underwent resection of sMNGs at one of two institutions. The following characteristics were assessed: tumor size and localization, surgical approach, duration of surgery, grade of resection, peri- and postoperative complication rates, and neurological outcome. Data were compared between the subgroups of patients according to the lesion’s relationship to the denticulate ligament and to surgical approach.RESULTSThe authors identified 48 patients with aMNGs, 86 patients with lateral MNGs, and 76 patients with posterior MNGs (pMNGs). Overall, 66.6% of aMNGs and 64% of pMNGs were reached via a ULPA. aMNGs that were approached via a ULPA showed reduced duration of surgery (131 vs 224 minutes, p < 0.0001) and had surgical complication rates and neurological outcomes comparable to those of lesions that were approached via a bilateral approach. No significant differences in complication rate, outcomes, and extent of resection were seen between aMNGs and pMNGs.CONCLUSIONSThe duration of surgery, extent of resection, and outcomes are comparable between aMNGs and pMNGs when removed via a ULPA. Thus, ULPA represents a safe route to achieve a gross-total resection, even in cases of aMNG.

Anterior Approach of Total Hip Arthroplasty, a Systematic Review

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haitham Abdel-Azem El-Helaly ◽  
Zeiad M Zakaria ◽  
Ahmed Essmat Abdel Mohsen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Approach ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Direct Anterior Approach ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Postoperative Outcomes ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background There are 3 commonly used surgical approaches to the hip: the anterior, lateral [anterolateral (Hardinge) and direct lateral (Watson-Jones)].and posterior approaches. Each one is different from the other in anatomy, technical aspects, outcome and complications. However there is no current consensus regarding which approach is the most suitable. Aim of the Work To compare various clinical outcomes and complication rates across the 3 approaches focusing on direct anterior approach which may influence surgeon choice in the future and to identify which approach is the best for THA. Patients and Methods This systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted following guidelines in the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), extension of network meta-analyses. The outcomes of interest were VAS, HHS and postoperative total complications after THA. Methods of measure for these outcomes were used according to the original studies. Results The lowest VAS pain and highest HHS after THA is the anterior approach followed by the lateral approach. The best approach class that had the lowest complications was posterior followed by the lateral approach, and the anterior approach had the highest risk of having complications after THA. Although the anterior approach had efficient postoperative outcomes, it should still be use with caution due to the high complication rates. Conclusion The best surgical approach for the lowest VAS pain and highest HHS after THA is the anterior approach followed by the lateral approach. The best approach class that had the lowest complications was posterior followed by the lateral approach, and the anterior approach had the highest risk of having complications after THA. Therefore, the use of the posterior approach is safe for THA, whereas although the anterior approach had efficient postoperative outcomes, it should still be use with caution due to the high complication rates.

scholarly journals Pain and rehabilitation after total hip arthroplasty are approach dependent: a multisurgeon, single-center, prospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Zimmerer ◽  
Mona Steinhaus ◽  
Erdmann Sickmüller ◽  
Benjamin Ulmar ◽  
Matthias Hauschild ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Walking Distance ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Inpatient Stay ◽  
Single Center ◽  
The Third

Abstract Purpose The aim of this study was to assess perioperative pain and mobilization after total hip arthroplasty (THA) using three different surgical approaches. Methods This was a multisurgeon, prospective, single-center cohort study. A total of 188 patients who underwent hip arthroplasty (THA) between February 2019 and April 2019 were analyzed according to the surgical approach used (direct anterior, lateral, and posterior approach). Outcome parameters were the daily walking distance during the inpatient stay, the pain level according to the visual analog scale (VAS) at rest and motion during the inpatient stay and at 6-week follow-up and the modified Harris Hips Score (mHHS) preoperatively and at 6 weeks. Results The walking distance within the groups increased significantly during the inpatient stay (p < 0.001). The DAA and posterior approach patients had a significantly longer walking distance than the lateral approach patients on the third postoperative day (DAA vs. lateral, p = 0.02; posterior vs. lateral 3, p = 0.03). DAA and posterior approach patients reported significantly less pain during motion on the third postoperative day and at 6-week follow-up than the lateral approach patients (3 postoperative day: DAA vs. lateral, p = 0.011; posterior vs. lateral, p = 0.04; 6 weeks control: DAA vs. lateral, p = 0.001; Posterior vs. lateral 3, p = 0.005). The mHHS demonstrated significant improvement within each group. However, lateral approach patients reported significantly less improvement than the DAA and posterior approach patients (DAA vs. lateral, p = 0.007; posterior vs. lateral, p = 0.021). Conclusion This study analyzed perioperative pain progression and short-term rehabilitation after THA according to the different surgical approaches. Direct anterior and posterior approaches have shown comparable improvements in pain, walking distance, and mHHS. Whether this effect persists over a longer period of time must be clarified in future studies. Study design Prospective cohort study, level of evidence, 2.

scholarly journals Instability in Patients with Lumbar Spine Disease or Fusion Undergoing Posterior Approach vs. Lateral Approach Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amritdev Parihar ◽  
Evan R. Deckard ◽  
Leonard T. Buller ◽  
R. Michael Meneghini
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Spine Pathology ◽  
Direct Lateral Approach ◽  
Postoperative Dislocation ◽  
Spine Disease

Background and Hypothesis:  Dislocation rates after total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with fixed spinopelvic motion due to lumbar spine disease or fusion have been reported as high as 20%. Few studies exist that compare dislocation rates in patients with spine pathology undergoing THA via different surgical approaches. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative dislocation rates in patients with lumbar spine disease or fusion between those undergoing a primary THA using a posterior versus direct lateral surgical approach.    Experimental Design or Project Methods:  With IRB approval, 1,205 primary THAs performed by two surgeons were retrospectively reviewed. One surgeon routinely performs THAs with a posterior approach while the other surgeon routinely uses a direct lateral approach. Chart review from the electronic medical record was conducted to identify patients who have lumbar spine disease or a lumbar spine fusion. Dislocations for patients with and without lumbar spine disease were compared by posterior approach and direct lateral approach.    Results:   767 posterior approach and 431 direct lateral approach THAs were available for analysis.  43.6% of all THAs had lumbar spine pathology (337/767 posterior and 185/431 direct lateral). The overall dislocation rate was 1.26% (15/1195).  The main predictors of dislocation in binary logistic regression were the presence of lumbar spine pathology (OR 5.24, 95% CI: 1.47–18.69, p=0.018) and posterior surgical approach (OR 7.93, 95% CI: 1.04–60.6, p=0.046).  The dislocation rate for direct lateral approach THAs with lumbar spine pathology was significantly lower compared to posterior approach THAs with lumbar spine pathology (0.0% vs 3.6%, p=0.011).    Conclusion and Potential Impact:   Although there were few dislocations, the study results suggest a direct lateral approach for primary THA may be beneficial to reduce postoperative dislocation for patients with limited spinopelvic motion due to lumbar spine pathology. 

scholarly journals Posterior Approach to Optimise Patient-Reported Outcome from Revision Hip Arthroplasty

2016 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 175-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Blackburn ◽  
Diana Lim ◽  
Ian Harrowell ◽  
Michael C. Parry ◽  
Ashley W. Blom ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Revision Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Satisfaction Scale ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Revision Tha

Introduction Most total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in the UK are performed through a posterior or lateral surgical approach. We aimed to investigate any difference in outcome from revision THA according to the approach at primary and revision THA surgery. Methods A retrospective cohort study of 205 patients who underwent revision THA for aseptic loosening. Patients rated their pain from 0-10 and completed the Self-Administered Patient Satisfaction Scale (SAPS), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), WOMAC and Short form-12 questionnaires. Results 205 patients (209 hips) from a cohort of 238 patients (243 hips, 86%) were available for analysis. The mean follow-up was 5 years (SD 1.71). Grouping by approach 20% (43/209) had both primary and revision procedures via a lateral approach, 20% (43/209) had their primary surgery via a lateral approach and their revision surgery via a posterior approach, whilst 60% (123/209) had both procedures via a posterior approach. The WOMAC and OHS were significantly better in patients who had a posterior approach for both primary and revision surgery, compared to those that did not (OHS p = 0.028, WOMAC p = 0.026). We found no significant differences in pain, satisfaction or health-related quality of life between the groups. Discussion Choice of approach for revision hip arthroplasty is influenced by a number of factors, but in clinical situations where either a lateral or posterior approach could be used, the posterior approach appears to be associated with better joint-specific outcomes. Registry data may help further explore the associations between surgical approach and the outcome from revision THA.

scholarly journals Comparison of sinus tarsi approach and extensile lateral approach for calcaneal fractures: A systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 230949902091528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tao Yu ◽  
Yuan Xiong ◽  
Alex Kang ◽  
Haichao Zhou ◽  
Wenbao He ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Wound Complications ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Calcaneal Fractures ◽  
Sinus Tarsi ◽  
Sinus Tarsi Approach ◽  
Extensile Lateral Approach ◽  
Meta Analyses

Purpose: Accumulated literature has reported the comparative efficacy of the sinus tarsi approach (STA) and the extensile lateral approach (ELA) for the treatment of calcaneal fractures (CFs). However, the best alternative treatment for CF is still inconsistent. Herein, the present systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses aims to achieve an evident conclusion by performing a comprehensive reanalysis of previous meta-analyses regarding the comparison of the STA and the ELA. Methods: We searched several databases, including Pubmed, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, SpringerLink, Clinical Trials.gov , OVID, and CNKI for the meta-analyses comparing the STA and the ELA for the treatment of CF. All related meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included. Two researchers independently assessed the quality of the articles and extracted the data. The Jadad decision algorithm was used to evaluate the evidence of the articles. Results: Ultimately, five meta-analyses were included in the present study. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews scores of these articles ranged from 5 to 9 with a median of 7. The analysis of best quality, Bai 2018, was selected based on the Jadad algorithm. In this article, the significant differences were found in wound complications and operating time, recovery of Böhler’s angle, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores, and the visual analog scale. Conclusion: The clinical relevance of the present study is that both the STA and the ELA are effective in alleviating pain and improving functionality in the treatment of CF. However, due to a shorter operation duration and lower complication rates, the STA was indicated to be a superior alternative for CF treatment.

Does surgical approach affect early outcomes following primary total hip replacement in obese patients?

2019 ◽  
pp. 112070001988264
Author(s):  
John Zhang ◽  
Michael C Wyatt ◽  
Chris M Frampton ◽  
Geoffrey Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Femoral Head ◽  
Total Hip Replacement ◽  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Posterior Approach ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Morbidly Obese ◽  
Obese Patients ◽  
Total Hip

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess whether obese patients undergoing primary total hip replacement (THR) via a posterior approach had superior revision rates and Oxford Hip Scores (OHS) compared to those via a lateral approach. Patients and methods: This is a retrospective cohort study using prospective data from the New Zealand Joint Registry applying STROBE and RECORD guidelines. Patients undergoing THR since 2010 were stratified by body mass index (BMI) into obese (BMI 30–39 kg/m2), and morbidly obese (BMI ⩾40 kg/m2) groups. All-cause revision rates, and 6-month OHS post-surgery were compared between groups. Multivariate analysis was performed. Results: 12,109 unilateral THRs in obese patients were identified. The mean follow-up was 2.8 years (range 0.01–6.95 years). Univariate analysis in the BMI ⩾ 40 group showed the posterior approach had a significantly lower all-cause revision rate (0.99/100 observed component years (ocys); 95% CI, 0.65–1.44/100 ocys) than the lateral approach (1.71/100 ocys (95% CI, 0.98–2.77/100 ocys), p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in dislocation rates between the surgical approaches. OHS was statistically higher in the posterior approach group in BMI 30–39 patients ( p < 0.001) but not clinically significant. Multivariate analysis showed femoral head size significantly influenced all-cause revision rates and mitigated against the increased risk associated with the surgical approach. Conclusion: The choice of surgical approach in obese patients conveys no advantage in overall revision rates in the short-term. Choosing an appropriate size of femoral head may be of greater importance than choice of surgical approach for obese patients in primary THR.

Posterolateral or direct lateral approach for hemiarthroplasty after femoral neck fractures: a systematic review

2020 ◽  
pp. 112070002093176
Author(s):  
Maria C J M Tol ◽  
Loes W A H van Beers ◽  
Nienke W Willigenburg ◽  
Taco Gosens ◽  
Martin J Heetveld ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Retrospective Studies ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Femoral Neck Fractures ◽  
Posterolateral Approach ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Walking Aids ◽  
Direct Lateral Approach

Background: The posterolateral approach (PLA) and direct lateral approach (DLA) are the most commonly used approaches for inserting a hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of femoral neck fractures. A recent review concluded that the routine use of PLA should be questioned, but this conclusion itself can be questioned. The aim of this study is to provide an updated overview and critical appraisal of the available evidence, focussing on outcomes most relevant for patients. Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of literature in the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and Cochrane Library. Studies (till June 2018) to identify hip fracture clinical trials/comparative studies comparing alternative surgical approaches (PLA and DLA). We explored sources of heterogeneity and conducted pooled analyses when appropriate. Results: 264 potentially eligible studies were identified of which 1 RCT, 3 prospective, 3 registry data and 5 retrospective studies were included. The RCT consisted performance and attrition bias. The mean MINORS score of the prospective/register studies was 17.3 (SD 3.5) and 13.8 (SD 1.9) of the 5 retrospective studies. The GRADE score for all the outcomes was very low. Due to the high and various types of biases across the included studies, we did not pool the data. None of studies assessed the activities of daily living functionality. 6 studies reported significantly more dislocations or reoperations due to dislocation in the PLA group, 6 other studies found no differences. DLA patients were more likely to develop abductor insufficiency leading to limping and more need for walking aids. The PLA patients tended to have better quality of life, less pain and more satisfaction compared to the DLA patients. Conclusion: Based on low-quality studies, PLA may be associated with more dislocations, but patients had less walking problems and a lower tendency to abductor insufficiency compared with DLA. Further clinical trials with methodology rigor are needed to determine which approach is more effective in terms of outcomes relevant to patients.

scholarly journals Comparison of Different Operative Approaches for Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Network Meta- Analysis and Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
pp. E381-E392
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lumbar Disc Herniation ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Lumbar Disc ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Reoperation Rate ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Dural Tear

BACKGROUND: New approaches and technologies can be beneficial for patients but also bring corresponding complications. Traditional pairwise meta-analyses cannot be used to comprehensively rank all surgical approaches. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) was to compare the outcomes of different surgical approaches for lumbar disc herniation (LDH). STUDY DESIGN: NMA of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for multiple treatment comparisons of LDH. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Ovid, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for RCTs comparing different surgical approaches for patients with LDH from inception to February 10, 2020. The Markov chain Monte Carlo methods were used to perform a hierarchical Bayesian NMA in WinBUGS version 1.4.3 using a random effects consistency model. The primary outcomes were disability and pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were complications and reoperation. The PROSPERO number was CRD42020179406. RESULTS: A total of 22 trials including 2529 patients and all 5 different approaches (open discectomy or microdiscectomy [OD/MD], microendoscopic discectomy [MED], percutaneous endoscopic discectomy [PED], percutaneous discectomy [PD], and tubular discectomy [TD]) were retrospectively retrieved. PED had the best efficacy in improving patients’ dysfunction with no statistical significance (probability = 50%). PD was significantly worse than OD/MD, MED, and PED in relieving patients’ pain (standardized mean differences: 0.87 [0.03, 1.76], 0.94 [0.06, 1.88], and 1.02 [0.13, 1.94], respectively). There was no statistically significant difference between any 2 surgical approaches in dural tear; intraoperative, postoperative, and overall complications; or reoperation rate. PED had the lowest dural tear rate and the lowest intraoperative and overall complication rates (probability = 51%, 67%, and 33%, respectively). TD had the lowest postoperative complication and reoperation rates (probability = 35% and 39%, respectively). LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this NMA include the inconsistent follow-up times, the criteria for complications, and the reasons for reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with other approaches used to treat LDH, PED had the best safety and efficacy in general, and TD had the lowest reoperation rate. Finally, we recommended PED for LDH. KEY WORDS: Lumbar disc herniation, network meta-analysis, minimally invasive surgery, surgical approaches, efficacy, safety

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document