SynthesisPloS one2013
Mini-incision versus standard incision total hip arthroplasty regarding surgical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cutting through infection risk: robotic-assisted vs. conventional total knee replacement surgery - a meta-analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Pooled it
- SuperPATH versus traditional hip replacement in efficacy and safety: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Direct and indirect comparisons in network meta-analysis of SuperPATH, direct anterior and posterior approaches in total hip arthroplasty.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Total Hip Arthroplasty through SuperPATH versus Conventional Approaches.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of short-term outcomes between direct anterior approach (DAA) and SuperPATH in total hip replacement: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of short-term outcomes between SuperPATH approach and conventional approaches in hip replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Pooled it
- Direct anterior versus posterolateral approaches for clinical outcomes after total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Pooled it
- Comparison of direct anterior, lateral, posterior and posterior-2 approaches in total hip arthroplasty: network meta-analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2018Pooled it
- Neither pre-operative education or a minimally invasive procedure have any influence on the recovery time after total hip replacement.International orthopaedics · 2015Trial
- Patient blood management and surgery: Impact of new surgical techniques on transfusion needs.Vox sanguinis · 2026Review
- Hip offset parameters and functional outcomes following total hip arthroplasty: association with performance, strength, and patient-reported outcomes.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- A comparison of the minimally invasive and traditional lateral approaches for hemiarthroplasty following a femoral neck fracture shows reduced postoperative pain and fewer blood transfusions.Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2025Article
- Robotic-assisted knee replacement surgery & infection: A historical foundation, systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023Review
- Perioperative Blood Management Strategies for Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty: Where Do We Currently Stand on This Matter?The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2020Review
- Heterotopic ossification and clinical results after total hip arthroplasty using the anterior minimally invasive and anterolateral approaches.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2020Article
- Article
- Blood loss and transfusion rate in short stem hip arthroplasty. A comparative study.International orthopaedics · 2017Article
- Inpatient mortality after elective primary total hip and knee joint arthroplasty in Botswana.International orthopaedics · 2016Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIt remains controversial whether mini-incision (MI) benefits patients in total hip arthroplasty (THA). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the effects of MI on surgical and functional outcomes in THA patients.
methodsA systematic electronic literature search (up to May 2013) was conducted to identify RCTs comparing MI with standard incision (SI) THA. The primary outcome measures were surgical and functional outcomes. According to the surgical approach taken, MI THA patients were divided into four subgroups for sub-group meta-analysis. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) or risk differences (RDs) with accompanying 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and pooled using a fixed-effect or random-effect model according to the heterogeneity.
resultsA total of 14 RCTs involving THA 1,174 patients met the inclusion criteria. The trials were medium risk of bias. The overall meta-analysis showed MI THA reduced total blood loss (95% CI, -201.83 to -21.18; p=.02) and length of hospital stay ( 95% CI, -0.67 to -0.08; p=.01) with significant heterogeneity. However, subgroup meta-analysis revealed posterior MI THA had perioperative advantages of reduced surgical duration ( 95% CI, -8.45 to -2.67; P<.001), less blood loss ( 95% CI, -107.20 to -1.73; P=.04) and shorter hospital stay ( 95% CI, -0.74 to -0.06; p=.002) with low heterogeneity. There were no significant differences between MI and SI THA groups in term of pain medication dose, functional outcome (HHS), radiological outcome or complications (P>.05, respectively).
conclusionsAlthough no definite overall conclusion can be arrived at on whether MI THA is superior to SI THA, posterior MI THA clearly result in a significant decrease in surgical duration, blood loss and hospital stay. It seems to be a safe minimally invasive surgical procedure without increasing the risk of component malposition or complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.