ArticleArthroplasty today2020
A Crossover Cohort of Direct Anterior vs Posterolateral Approach in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: What Does the Patient Prefer?
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of direct anterior vs. posterior approach in primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis on enhanced recovery after surgery.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Outcomes and Preferences for Total Hip Arthroplasty Approach-Crossover Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Does surgical approach matter? Evaluating patient-reported outcomes in bilateral staged total hip arthroplasty.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe utilization of the direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) continues to markedly increase. Despite proposed advantages, there are limited data regarding outcomes of staged bilateral THA via 2 different approaches in the same patient. The purpose of this study was to elucidate patient perspective on the THA approach in a crossover cohort of patients who underwent consecutive THAs via the posterolateral approach (PLA) followed by a contralateral DAA.
methodsA retrospective chart review and telephone interview were performed on 37 patients who underwent both THA approaches by a single surgeon from 2009 to 2019. Perioperative outcomes, complications/reoperations, and the patient-preferred approach were collected. The mean clinical follow-up was 105 and 44 months after PLA and DAA, respectively.
resultsAfter DAA THA, patients demonstrated lower postoperative day 1 visual analog scale pain scores (1.8 vs 2.9,
conclusionIn the same patient direct comparison, the DAA for THA may lead to less pain and improved ambulation in the early postoperative period. Furthermore, most patients prefer the DAA and believe it is easier to recover from than the PLA.
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.