ArticleArthroplasty today2025
Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes After Direct Anterior Versus Mini Posterior Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparative analysis of surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative outcomes including primary and revision cases.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a successful surgical treatment for end-stage hip arthritis. There is controversy over whether the surgical approach leads to any differences in implant sizing, implant positioning, and clinical outcomes. This study sought to compare radiographic and clinical outcomes when performing primary THA through the direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterior approach (PA). Methods: In this retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing primary THA, 198 DAA patients were matched to 198 PA patients. Surgeries were performed by 3 fellowship-trained surgeons. Radiographic parameters analyzed were acetabular cup anteversion and abduction angles, femoral stem coronal alignment, femoral offset, and leg-length discrepancy. Postoperative complications, including periprosthetic joint infection, wound complications, periprosthetic fracture, and dislocation, were extracted from the medical record. Statistical analysis was performed to compare radiographic and clinical outcomes between groups. Results: There were no statistically significant differences for any postoperative complications between the 2 groups. One dislocation occurred in the PA group, and no dislocations occurred in the DAA group. DAA had a longer operative time (117 vs 79 minutes, Conclusions: Both DAA and PA lead to acceptable clinical and radiographic outcomes for primary THA, with significant differences noted for cup position, femoral offset, and use of dual mobility components. These differences likely represent surgeon factors to help mitigate the risk for dislocation.
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.