ArticleCureus2025
Comparisons of Early Outcomes Between the Superior Approach and Posterior Approach in Total Hip Arthroplasty for Patients With Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose This study aimed to compare the early clinical outcomes between the superior approach (SA) and posterior approach (PA) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), hypothesizing that SA offers advantages in terms of blood loss, complications, and early clinical outcomes. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 58 THAs performed on patients with ONFH between 2016 and 2023, divided into SA (n = 33) and PA (n = 25) groups. Demographic data, surgical parameters, radiographic outcomes, early clinical outcomes (Merle d'Aubigné-Postel and Harris Hip Scores (HHS)), and perioperative complications were analyzed. Statistical analyses included the Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test, with significance set at p < 0.05. Results The SA group demonstrated significantly lower intraoperative blood loss (251 ± 130.9 mL vs. 504 ± 631.5 mL; p < 0.01) and perioperative total blood loss (416.5 ± 264.5 mL vs. 694 ± 510.3 mL; p < 0.05) compared to that in the PA group. At 1.5 months, the SA group showed better ability to walk (Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score: 4.3 ± 1.4 vs. 3.4 ± 1.3; p < 0.05) compared to the PA group. While both groups exhibited significant postoperative improvements, no significant differences were observed in the HHS. Two cases of dislocation and one of nerve palsy were observed in the PA group, whereas no complications were reported in the SA group. Conclusion This SA offers a minimally invasive option with fewer complications and is particularly advantageous for patients with ONFH.
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.