Trial reportJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
Effect of a wound protector on soft-tissue injury and early recovery after endoscopic direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundThe endoscopic direct anterior approach (Endo-DAA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) aims to minimize soft-tissue trauma and accelerate recovery. Whether adding a disposable wound protector can further reduce early muscle injury and enhance recovery remains unclear. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact of wound protector use on biological, clinical, and functional outcomes after Endo-DAA THA.
methodsSeventy-six patients undergoing primary Endo-DAA THA were prospectively randomized (1:1) to either a wound protector or control group. The only intraoperative difference between groups was the use of a wound protector. The primary outcome was serum creatine kinase (CK) at 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included serum myoglobin at 6 h, C-reactive protein at 24 h, pain visual analog scale (VAS) during activity, independent ambulation within 12 h, lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) symptoms, wound complications and satisfaction, and functional scores using the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12). Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable between groups. The wound protector group had significantly lower postoperative CK (422.5 vs. 665.5 U/L; median difference: -228.0; 95% CI: -354.0 to -109.0; P < 0.001), myoglobin (299.9 vs. 481.2 ng/mL; P < 0.001), and C-reactive protein levels (30.3 vs. 45.1 mg/L; P = 0.024). Pain scores were lower at 12 and 24 h, and more patients achieved independent ambulation within 12 h (86.8% vs. 55.3%; risk ratio [RR]: 1.57; 95% CI: 1.14 to 2.16; P = 0.002). Fewer wound complications (7.8% vs. 34.2%; RR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.75; P = 0.005) and LFCN symptoms (36.8% vs. 65.7%; P = 0.012) were observed. Early functional scores were higher in the protector group, while midterm outcomes were similar.
conclusionsIn Endo-DAA THA, the use of a disposable wound protector significantly reduced early muscle injury and systemic inflammation, alleviated immediate postoperative pain, facilitated earlier mobilization, and enhanced early wound healing and functional recovery without increasing operative time or hospital stay. These benefits were primarily observed during the early postoperative phase, which aligns with the principles of enhanced recovery after surgery.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2300076225. Registered on September 27, 2023.
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.