Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29299478›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2017

The Röttinger approach for total hip arthroplasty: technique, comparison to the direct lateral approach and review of literature.

Ronald E Delanois, Assem A Sultan, Ahmed A Albayar, Anton Khlopas, Chukwuweike U Gwam, Nipun Sodhi, Suela Lamaj, Jared M Newman, Michael A Mont

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Comparison of Abductor Muscle Strength and Harris Hip Score after Total Hip Arthroplasty].Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Surgical Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Outcomes of the Supine Anterior-based Muscle-sparing Approach for Primary and Revision Hip Arthroplasty.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ronald E DelanoisSinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Assem A SultanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Ahmed A AlbayarDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Anton KhlopasDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Chukwuweike U GwamSinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Nipun SodhiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Suela LamajDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Jared M NewmanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, USA.
Michael A MontDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Cleveland Clinic · USSinai Hospital · USSUNY Downstate Health Sciences University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiple approaches to the hip joint have been developed utilizing various intervals and/or intermuscular planes when performing a total hip arthroplasty (THA), each proposing certain advantages. Of these, the Röttinger approach (modified anterolateral or Watson-Jones) is potentially muscle-sparing. Multiple studies have demonstrated favorable outcomes with this approach. However, others showed more complications with a slow learning curve. Due to the paucity of evidence we conducted this study to: (I) present our operative experience and technique of the Röttinger approach; (II) compare short-term complications and operative room (OR) times of this approach to the direct lateral; and (III) review the available literature.

methodsThis was a review of a longitudinally maintained single-surgeon database of patients who underwent primary THA using either the Röttinger or direct lateral approach. A total of 100 consecutive patients (100 hips) who underwent primary unilateral THA using the Röttinger approach between April 1

resultsAt mean follow-up time of 12 weeks (range, 6 to 24 weeks), there were two patients in the Röttinger cohort who experienced lateral femoral cutaneous nerve palsies (2%), which were self-limited and resolved at 6 and 12 weeks. In the direct lateral cohort, there was one hip dislocation (2%) at 6 weeks post-operatively, which was successfully managed by a closed reduction. In patients who received the Röttinger approach, mean OR time was 130 minutes (range, 74 to 202 minutes), compared to the direct lateral cohort mean of 111 minutes (range, 71 to 222 minutes). Our literature analysis covered 2,252 patients who received the Röttinger approach

conclusionsIn this analysis of a single-surgeon experience of the Röttinger approach compared to the direct lateral, we presented our experience with the technique and demonstrated the safety and feasibility of this relatively novel approach. Our study results demonstrated that patients who underwent this approach had similar short-term complications and OR times to those who underwent the direct lateral approach. Additionally, our findings agree with previous comparative studies that demonstrated similar outcomes of this approach. Therefore, it can be used as an alternative for primary THA.

Indexed as

direct lateral approachoutcomesRöttinger approachTotal hip arthroplasty (THA)

Identifiers

PMID29299478
PMCPMC5750259
OpenAlexW2772626372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.