A comparison between the direct anterior and posterior approaches for total hip arthroplasty: the role of an 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway.

Aims: We assessed the difference in hospital based and early clinical outcomes between the direct anterior approach and the posterior approach in patients who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Patients And Methods: The outcome was assessed in 448 (203 males, 245 females) consecutive patients undergoing unilateral primary THA after the implementation of an 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway. In all, 265 patients (mean age: 71 years (49 to 89); 117 males and 148 females) had surgery using the direct anterior approach (DAA) and 183 patients (mean age: 70 years (26 to 100); 86 males and 97 females) using a posterior approach. The groups were compared for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, the side of the operation, pre-operative Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and attendance at 'Joint school'. Mean follow-up was 18.1 months (one to 50).

Results: There was no significant difference in mean length of stay (p = 0.07), pain scores on the day of surgery, the first, second and third post-operative days (p = 0.36, 0.23, 0.25 and 0.59, respectively), the day of mobilisation (p = 0.12), the mean OHS at six and 24 months (p = 0.08, and 0.29, respectively), the incidence of infection (p = 1.0), dislocation (p = 1.0), re-operation (p = 0.21) or 28 days' re-admission (p = 0.06). Significantly more patients in the DAA group achieved a planned discharge target of three days post-operatively (68% vs 56%, p = 0.007). The rate of periprosthetic femoral fractures was significantly higher in the DAA group (p = 0.04).

Conclusion: We conclude that there is no difference in clinical outcomes between the DAA and the posterior approach in patients undergoing THA when an 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway is used. However, a significantly higher rate of periprosthetic femoral fractures remains a concern with the DAA, even in experienced hands.

Take Home Message: Our results show that the DAA for THA is not superior to posterior approach when 'Enhanced Recovery' pathway is used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:754-60.