Direct anterior and direct lateral approach in patients with femoral neck fractures receiving a total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Acta Orthopaedica Pub Date : 2025-01-13 DOI:10.2340/17453674.2025.42847
John Magne Hoseth, Tommy Frøseth Aae, Øystein Bjerkestrand Lian, Tor Åge Myklebust, Otto Schnell Husby
{"title":"Direct anterior and direct lateral approach in patients with femoral neck fractures receiving a total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.","authors":"John Magne Hoseth, Tommy Frøseth Aae, Øystein Bjerkestrand Lian, Tor Åge Myklebust, Otto Schnell Husby","doi":"10.2340/17453674.2025.42847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong> The optimal approach to the hip joint in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures (dFNF) receiving a total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains controversial. We compared the direct lateral approach (DLA) with the direct anterior approach (DAA) primarily on Timed Up and Go (TUG), and secondarily on the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), EQ5D-5L, and the EQ5D-VAS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> Between 2018 and 2023, we conducted a randomized controlled trial including elderly patients with dFNFs treated with THA. The primary outcome was the difference in TUG at 6 weeks postoperatively. Key secondary outcomes were TUG at 2, 12, and at 52 weeks postoperatively, and FJS, OHS, EQ5D-5L, and EQ5D-VAS at 2, 6, 12, and at 52 weeks postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> 130 patients with a mean age of 78.6 (standard deviation 1.2) were allocated to DAA (n = 64) or DLA (n = 66). There was no statistically significant difference in TUG times at 6 weeks postoperatively between the DAA and the DLA, 16.0 s (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.2-18.7) vs 17.8 s (CI 15.1-20.4), estimated mean difference -1.8 s (CI -5.7 to 2.0). However, patients who underwent DAA had a significantly higher FJS at 2, 6, and 12 weeks.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> Among elderly patients with dFNF we found no difference between DAA or DLA regarding crude mobility as demonstrated with the TUG test, but patients treated with DAA showed better outcomes in the FJS in the early post-fracture period though not at 52 weeks.</p>","PeriodicalId":6916,"journal":{"name":"Acta Orthopaedica","volume":"96 ","pages":"73-79"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11726854/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Orthopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2025.42847","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose:  The optimal approach to the hip joint in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures (dFNF) receiving a total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains controversial. We compared the direct lateral approach (DLA) with the direct anterior approach (DAA) primarily on Timed Up and Go (TUG), and secondarily on the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), EQ5D-5L, and the EQ5D-VAS.

Methods:  Between 2018 and 2023, we conducted a randomized controlled trial including elderly patients with dFNFs treated with THA. The primary outcome was the difference in TUG at 6 weeks postoperatively. Key secondary outcomes were TUG at 2, 12, and at 52 weeks postoperatively, and FJS, OHS, EQ5D-5L, and EQ5D-VAS at 2, 6, 12, and at 52 weeks postoperatively.

Results:  130 patients with a mean age of 78.6 (standard deviation 1.2) were allocated to DAA (n = 64) or DLA (n = 66). There was no statistically significant difference in TUG times at 6 weeks postoperatively between the DAA and the DLA, 16.0 s (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.2-18.7) vs 17.8 s (CI 15.1-20.4), estimated mean difference -1.8 s (CI -5.7 to 2.0). However, patients who underwent DAA had a significantly higher FJS at 2, 6, and 12 weeks.

Conclusion:  Among elderly patients with dFNF we found no difference between DAA or DLA regarding crude mobility as demonstrated with the TUG test, but patients treated with DAA showed better outcomes in the FJS in the early post-fracture period though not at 52 weeks.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Orthopaedica
Acta Orthopaedica 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
8.10%
发文量
105
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Orthopaedica (previously Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica) presents original articles of basic research interest, as well as clinical studies in the field of orthopedics and related sub disciplines. Ever since the journal was founded in 1930, by a group of Scandinavian orthopedic surgeons, the journal has been published for an international audience. Acta Orthopaedica is owned by the Nordic Orthopaedic Federation and is the official publication of this federation.
期刊最新文献
An algorithm for identifying causes of reoperations after orthopedic fracture surgery in health administrative data: a diagnostic accuracy study using the Danish National Patient Register. An Acta Orthopaedica educational article: Treatment of pediatric spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. Direct anterior and direct lateral approach in patients with femoral neck fractures receiving a total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Vascularized fibular grafting following tumor resection demonstrates acceptable long-term outcomes in Denmark: a national retrospective cohort study. 5-year migration and inducible displacement of the uncemented LCS and ATTUNE rotating platform knee systems: a secondary report of a randomized controlled RSA trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1