ArticleJB & JS open access
Comparison of the Type, Impact, and Resolution of Complications Following Direct Anterior Versus Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Propensity-Weighted Analysis.
Article in JB & JS open access. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prior studies have reported higher rates of periprosthetic fracture, superficial infection, and neurologic deficit with the direct anterior approach (DAA), and higher rates of dislocation with the posterior approach (PA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite these differences, the overall clinical burden of complications between approaches remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the profiles, severity, impact, and resolution of 5 clinically important complications between DAA and PA THA. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of 11,783 consecutive primary THAs performed between 2010 and 2021 across 3 centers within a single healthcare system, using either the DAA (n = 4,451) or the PA (n = 7,332). Complications assessed included dislocation, infection, periprosthetic fracture (PPFx), aseptic loosening, and neurologic deficit. Severity was graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification (I = minor, V = death). Impact was defined by reoperation burden, and outcomes were categorized as resolved or persistent. Kaplan-Meier survivorship and propensity-weighted Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare complication risk. Results: The overall 1-year risk of surgical complications did not differ between DAA and PA (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.06; p = 0.208). Dislocation occurred more frequently with PA THA than DAA THA (1.9% vs. 0.4%; HR, 5.20; 95% CI, 3.04-8.90; p < 0.001). Superficial infections were more frequent with the DAA (1.6% vs. 0.8%; HR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.68-3.53; p < 0.001). The risk of deep infection, PPFx, aseptic loosening, and neurologic deficit did not differ significantly between approaches. Among patients with complications, the proportion classified as severe (Clavien-Dindo III-V) was similar, and adjusted analyses showed no difference in the odds of severe complications (adjusted odds ratio 1.34 for PA vs DAA; 95% CI, 0.95-1.91; p = 0.099). Complication impact and resolution were likewise comparable. Conclusion: Although the profile of complications differed between DAA and PA THA, the severity, early clinical impact, and resolution of complications appeared similar. Notably, DAA was associated with a lower risk of dislocation and a higher risk of superficial infection compared with PA THA. Level of Evidence: Level III, Retrospective Comparative Study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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.