Clinician Article

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the standard versus mini-incision posterior approach to total hip arthroplasty.

  • Berstock JR
  • Blom AW
  • Beswick AD
J Arthroplasty. 2014 Oct;29(10):1970-82. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.05.021. Epub 2014 Jun 3. (Review)
PMID: 25023783
Read abstract Read evidence summary
  • Surgery - Orthopaedics
    Relevance - 6/7
    Newsworthiness - 6/7


The mini-incision posterior approach may appeal to surgeons comfortable with the standard posterior approach to the hip. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of these two approaches. Twelve randomised controlled trials and four non-randomised trials comprising of 1498 total hip arthroplasties were included. The mini-incision posterior approach was associated with an early improvement in Harris hip score of 1.8 points (P<0.001), reduced operating time (5minutes, P<0.001), length of hospital stay (14hours, P<0.001), intraoperative and total blood loss (63ml, P<0.001 and 119ml, P<0.001 respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of dislocation, nerve injury, infection or venous thromboembolic events. The minimally invasive posterior approach appears to provide a safe and acceptable alternative to the standard incision posterior approach.

Register for free access to all Professional content