Download PDF
The Journal of Hip Surgery 2022; 06(01): 029-034
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740553
Original Article

Effect of Surgical Approach on Length of Stay, Cost, and Early Complication Rate in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Joshua C. Campbell
1   Department of Orthopedics, The George Washington University MFA, Washington, District of Columbia
,
Sean S. Rajaee
2   Department of Orthopedics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
,
Andrew A. Palosaari 
1   Department of Orthopedics, The George Washington University MFA, Washington, District of Columbia
,
Derek Ju
2   Department of Orthopedics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
,
Charles Moon
2   Department of Orthopedics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
,
Guy Paiement
2   Department of Orthopedics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
,
Brad Penenberg
2   Department of Orthopedics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a historically popular and successful operation. While many steps of the operation are consistent between practitioners, discussion around which approach constitutes the “best” approach for routine, primary THA remains an open question.

Objective The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of the surgical approach on hospital length of stay (LOS), hospital costs, and complication rates. A multisurgeon review of a single hospital was conducted to evaluate three surgical approaches: superior (SA), posterior (PA), and direct anterior (DAA).

Methods All elective primary THAs performed between July 2013 and July 2016 were reviewed in an administrative database. Two surgeons performed SA, three surgeons performed PA, and two surgeons performed DAA. A total of 1,799 arthroplasties were analyzed: 980 (SA), 685 (PA), and 134 (DAA). Multivariate logistic, Poisson, and linear regression models were used to calculate the effects of each approach on LOS, cost, and per cent discharge home while adjusting for age, severity of illness scores, obesity, and smoking.

Results After adjusting for patient characteristics, mean LOS for SA (1.8 days) was lower than both PA (2.4, p < 0.001) and DAA (2.9, p < 0.001), and PA (2.4) was lower than DAA (2.9, p < 0.001). Mean hospital costs were lower for SA than PA ($738 difference, p < 0.001) and DAA ($2,222 difference, p < 0.001), and PA was lower than DAA ($1,420 difference, p < 0.001). Both SA (88.7%) and PA (86.1%) were associated with a higher rate of discharge to home than DAA (78.4%, p = 0.002, p < 0.001, respectively). SA and PA were associated with a lower 30-day readmission (1.3%) compared with DAA (5.2%, p < 0.001) with no difference in 90-day readmissions seen.

Conclusion When controlling for patient factors, the SA was associated with a decreased LOS, decreased costs, and increased likelihood of discharge home compared with both the PA and DAA with no increase in 90-day readmissions.

Keywords

total joint arthroplasty - posterior approach - superior approach - anterior approach - surgical outcomes

Ethical Review Committee Statement

This study was conducted using deidentified, HIPAA compliant patient data and was deemed to be exempt from IRB review. This exemption was granted by the Institutional Review Board at Cedars Sinai Medical Center, where the study was conducted.




Publication History

Received: 23 June 2021

Accepted: 15 November 2021

Article published online:
03 March 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89 (04) 780-785
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Jahng KH, Rodriquez JA. The mini anterior approach: optimizes total hip arthroplasty outcomes-Affirms. Semin Arthroplasty 2015; 26 (03) 136-139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Penenerg BL, Campbell JC, Woehnl A. The mini anterior approach: optimizes total hip arthroplasty outcomes-Opposes. Semin Arthroplasty 2015; 26 (03) 140-145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Nakata K, Nishikawa M, Yamamoto K, Hirota S, Yoshikawa H. A clinical comparative study of the direct anterior with mini-posterior approach: two consecutive series. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (05) 698-704
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Sheth D, Cafri G, Inacio MC, Paxton EW, Namba RS. Anterior and anteriolateral approaches for THA are associated with lower dislocation risk without higher revision risk. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (11) 3401-3408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hamilton WG, Parks NL, Huynh C. Comparison of cup alignment, jump distance, and complications in consecutive series of anterior approach and posterior approach total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (11) 1959-1962
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Rathod PA, Bhalla S, Deshmukh AJ, Rodriguez JA. Does fluoroscopy with anterior hip arthroplasty decrease acetabular cup variability compared with a nonguided posterior approach?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (06) 1877-1885
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Brody JE. Less-invasive hip surgery makes inroads. The New York Times, February 8, 2010
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Langudo L. Same day hip replacement: hip replacement surgery is now an outpatient procedure due to an increasingly popular surgical technique; surgeons promise less pain and faster recovery. The Wall Street Journal, February 21, 2016. Last accessed on February 9, 2022, at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/same-day-hip-replacement-1454345289
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Poehling-Monaghan KL, Kamath AF, Taunton MJ, Pagnano MW. Direct anterior versus miniposterior THA with the same advanced perioperative protocols: surprising early clinical results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473 (02) 623-631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Taunton MJ, Trousdale RT, Sierra RJ, Kaufman K, Pagnano MW. John Charnley Award: randomized clinical trial of direct anterior and miniposterior approach THA: which provides better functional recovery?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018; 476 (02) 216-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Mohan R, Yi PH, Hansen EN. Evaluating online information regarding the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30 (05) 803-807
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Bhandari M, Matta JM, Dodgin D. et al; Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty Collaborative Investigators. Outcomes following the single-incision anterior approach to total hip arthroplasty: a multicenter observational study. Orthop Clin North Am 2009; 40 (03) 329-342
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Jewett BA, Collis DK. High complication rate with anterior total hip arthroplasties on a fracture table. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469 (02) 503-507
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Rüdiger HA, Betz M, Zingg PO, McManus J, Dora CF. Outcome after proximal femoral fractures during primary total hip replacement by the direct anterior approach. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2013; 133 (04) 569-573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Tippets DM, Zaryanov AV, Burke WV. et al. Incidence of heterotopic ossification in direct anterior total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective radiographic review. J Arthroplasty 2014; 29 (09) 1835-1838
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Woolson ST, Pouliot MA, Huddleston JI. Primary total hip arthroplasty using an anterior approach and a fracture table: short-term results from a community hospital. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (07) 999-1005
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Yi C, Agudelo JF, Dayton MR, Morgan SJ. Early complications of anterior supine intermuscular total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2013; 36 (03) e276-e281
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Martin CT, Pugely AJ, Gao Y, Clark CR. A comparison of hospital length of stay and short-term morbidity between the anterior and the posterior approaches to total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2013; 28 (05) 849-854
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Meneghini RM, Elston AS, Chen AF, Kheir MM, Fehring TK, Springer BD. Direct anterior approach: risk factor for early femoral failure of cementless total hip arthroplasty: a multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (02) 99-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Panichkul P, Parks NL, Ho H, Hopper Jr RH, Hamilton WG. New approach and stem increased femoral revision rate in total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics 2016; 39 (01) e86-e92
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Siljander MP, Whaley JD, Koueiter DM, Alsaleh M, Karadsheh MS. Length of stay, discharge disposition, and 90-day complications and revisions following primary total hip arthroplasty: a comparison of the direct anterior, posterolateral, and direct superior approaches. J Arthroplasty 2020; 35 (06) 1658-1661
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Penenberg BL, Bolling WS, Riley M. Percutaneously assisted total hip arthroplasty (PATH): a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (Suppl. 04) 209-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Barrett AA, Ezzibdeh RM, Horst PK, Roger DJ, Amanatullah DF. Direct superior approach to the hip for total hip arthroplasty. JBJS Essential Surg Tech 2019; 9 (02) e17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Roger DJ, Hill D. Minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty using a transpiriformis approach: a preliminary report. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (08) 2227-2234
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Hayden BL, Murphy WS, Murphy SB. The direct anterior approach: first among equals–opposes: the superior approach is the superior approach. In: Seminars in Arthroplasty. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Miller LE, Gondusky JS, Bhattacharyya S, Kamath AF, Boettner F, Wright J. Does surgical approach affect outcomes in total hip arthroplasty through 90 days of follow-up? A systematic review with meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33 (04) 1296-1302
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Pincus D, Jenkinson R, Paterson M, Leroux T, Ravi B. Association between surgical approach and major surgical complications in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. JAMA 2020; 323 (11) 1070-1076
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Ito Y, Matsushita I, Watanabe H, Kimura T. Anatomic mapping of short external rotators shows the limit of their preservation during total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (06) 1690-1695
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Rodriguez JA, Walter BL, Cooper HJ. SE32—Applied Anatomy. Chicago: AAOS; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Meneghini RM, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Hozack WJ. Muscle damage during MIS total hip arthroplasty: Smith-Petersen versus posterior approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006; 453 (453) 293-298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Amanatullah DF, Masini MA, Roger DJ, Pagnano MW. Greater inadvertent muscle damage in direct anterior approach when compared with the direct superior approach for total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2016; 98-B (08) 1036-1042
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Grimaldi A. Assessing lateral stability of the hip and pelvis. Man Ther 2011; 16 (01) 26-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Kummer B. Is the Pauwels' theory of hip biomechanics still valid? A critical analysis, based on modern methods. Ann Anat 1993; 175 (03) 203-210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Chow J, Fitch DA. In-hospital costs for total hip replacement performed using the supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip replacement surgical technique. Int Orthop 2017; 41 (06) 1119-1123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Gofton W, Fitch DA. In-hospital cost comparison between the standard lateral and supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip surgical techniques for total hip replacement. Int Orthop 2016; 40 (03) 481-485
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Xie J, Zhang H, Wang L, Yao X, Pan Z, Jiang Q. Comparison of supercapsular percutaneously assisted approach total hip versus conventional posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Surg Res 2017; 12 (01) 138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Tanzer D, Smith K, Tanzer M. Changing patient expectations decreases length of stay in an enhanced recovery program for THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018; 476 (02) 372-378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar