SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2019
Total hip arthroplasty: minimally invasive surgery or not? Meta-analysis of clinical trials.
Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 14 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bacteriophages in Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infections: A Promising Tool in the Era of Antibiotic Resistance.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical relevance of patient-reported outcome measures in patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Antithrombotic prophylaxis following total hip arthroplasty: a level I Bayesian network meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024Pooled it
- Risk factors for liner wear and head migration in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Serum biomarkers for the assessment of muscle damage in various surgical approaches in primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative studies.International orthopaedics · 2022Pooled it
- Factors influencing the outcomes of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Pooled it
- Imageless navigation for primary total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis study.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 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
- Nerve palsy, dislocation and revision rate among the approaches for total hip arthroplasty: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled 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
- Bipolar versus monopolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femur neck fractures: a meta-analysis study.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2020Pooled it
- Posterior-stabilized versus cruciate-retained implants for total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical trials.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2019Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of the early clinical efficacy of the SuperPath approach versus the modified Hardinge approach in total hip arthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Trial
- The functional outcome and complication rate in total hip arthroplasty through minimally invasive and traditional posterolateral approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EFORT open reviews · 2026Article
- Nerve injury after total hip arthroplasty: etiology, preventive strategies and medico-legal considerations.Annals of medicine · 2025Review
- Comparison of minimally invasive and standard posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty for Crowe type 2 dysplastic coxarthrosis: clinical, radiographic, and functional outcomes.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Management of Venous Thromboembolism After Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2025Article
- Elastic Compression Dressing after Total Hip Replacement Slightly Reduces Leg Swelling: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere exist a relevant number of clinical trials comparing the minimally invasive surgery to the standard-invasive approach in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Up to date, there are still debates concerning the most effective approach in THA.
aimThe purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes concerning patients undergoing primary THA performed via the minimally invasive versus standard-invasive surgery incision. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe search was performed in the main databases, evaluating both quantitative and qualitative results. All the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised controlled trials (nRCTs) comparing the minimally invasive versus the standard-invasive approach were enrolled in this study. We focused on the clinical and radiological outcomes and on the complication rate. Study methodological quality was assessed performing the PEDro critical appraisal scale. All meta-analyses were performed using the Review Manager software. To analyse the publication's bias, we performed the Funnel plot.
resultWe enrolled in our study 4761 patients, undergoing to 4842 total hip arthroplasties. The mean follow-up was 22.26 months. In favour of the minimally invasive group, we reported less total estimated blood loss, shorter surgical duration, and a shorter length of stay. In favour of the standard-invasive group, we reported a higher value of the Harris hip score. Concerning the radiological outcomes, we did not report substantial differences across the two exposures. No difference was observed regarding the risk of femoral fractures, dislocation, and revision rates. We evidenced an increasing risk occurred in an iatrogenic nerve palsy during the minimally invasive approach.
conclusionBased on currently available evidences concerning the outcomes following THA and the analysis of our results, we stated no remarkable benefits of the minimally invasive compared to the standard-invasive surgery.
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.