Background and purposeCriticism of the lateral approach (LA) for hip arthroplasty is mainly based on the risk of poor patient-reported outcomes compared to the posterior approach (PA). However, there have been no controlled studies comparing patient-reported outcomes between them. In this randomized controlled trial, we tested the hypothesis that patient-reported outcomes are better in patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty (THA) with PA than in those who have undergone THA with LA, 12 months postoperatively.Patients and methods80 patients with hip osteoarthritis (mean age 61 years) were randomized to THA using PA or the modified direct LA. We recorded outcome measures preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively using the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score–Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS) as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were HOOS-Pain, HOOS-Quality-Of-Life, EQ-5D, UCLA Activity Score, and limping.ResultsWe found no statistically significant difference in the improvements in HOOS-PS between the treatment groups at 12-month follow-up. All secondary outcomes showed similar results except for limping, where PA patients improved significantly more than LA patients.InterpretationContrary to our hypothesis, patients treated with PA did not improve more than patients treated with LA regarding physical function, pain, physical activity, and quality of life 12 months postoperatively. However, limping was more pronounced in the LA patients.

In a double-blind, randomised study of thromboprophylaxis in patients undergoing total hip replacement, we compared a low-molecular-weight heparin with a placebo. Of the 120 patients enrolled, 112 completed the trial; 58 in the treatment group and 54 in the placebo group. Nine (16%) patients in the treatment group and 19 (35%) in the placebo group developed deep venous thrombosis, diagnosed by the 125I-fibrinogen uptake test (p < 0.02). Verification was obtained by phlebography in 86% of the patients. Prolonged surgery increased the risk of thrombosis in the placebo group but not in the treatment group (p < 0.05). There were significantly more cases of deep venous thrombosis in the placebo group during the first four postoperative days (p < 0.02). The groups did not differ with respect to peroperative and postoperative bleeding. Low-molecular-weight heparin offers safe and easily administered thromboprophylaxis in total hip replacement.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundTotal hip replacement provides pain relief and improves physical function and quality of life in patients with end-stage hip osteoarthritis. The incidence of hip replacement operations is expected to increase due to the growing elderly population. Overall, the posterior approach and lateral approach are the two most commonly used approaches for hip replacement operations. The posterior approach is associated with an increased risk of revision due to dislocations, and some studies have shown that the lateral approach is associated with reduced patient-reported outcomes, including physical function and pain; however, this has not been investigated in a randomised controlled trial with a twelve-month follow-up. We hypothesized that the lateral approach has an inferior outcome in patient-reported outcome compared with the posterior approach after one year.Methods/DesignThe trial is a prospective, double blinded, parallel-group controlled trial with balanced randomisation [1: 1]. Patients with hip osteoarthritis scheduled for hip replacement surgery, aged 45–70 years, will be consecutively recruited and randomised into two groups. Group A will receive hip replacement using the posterior approach, and Group B will receive hip replacement using the lateral approach. The primary end-point for assessing the outcome of the two interventions will be twelve months after surgery. Follow-up will also be performed after three and six months. The primary outcome is Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, subscale of "Physical function Short form" (HOOS-PS) Secondary outcome measures include two other subscales of HOOS ("Pain" and "Hip related Quality of Life"), physical activity level (UCLA activity score), limping (HHS) and general health status (EQ-5D-3L). Explorative outcomes include physical function test, 3D-gait-analysis and muscle strength.DiscussionTo our knowledge, this is the first randomised controlled trial comparing the posterior approach with the lateral approach with patient reported outcome as the primary outcome and with a twelve-month follow-up.Trial registrationClinicaltrial.gov:NCT01616667.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-354) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Nerve block of the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) is a predominantly sensory block. It reduces pain following total hip arthroplasty (THA), but the non-responder rate is high. We hypothesized, that an increased volume of ropivacaine, would result in greater coverage of incisions used for THA. Methods We conducted a randomized, blinded trial in 20 healthy volunteers. Participants were randomized to receive bilateral LFCN-blocks with 8 mL ropivacaine 0.75% on the left side and 16 mL ropivacaine 0.75% on the right side, or vice versa. Allocation was blinded to both participants and outcome assessors. Before nerve block performance, incision lines for posterior and lateral THA approaches were depicted with invisible ultraviolet-paint, thereby securing sufficient blinding during outcome assessment. The blocked area was mapped using temperature and mechanical discrimination tests. Quadriceps muscle strength was monitored. Primary outcome was coverage of the posterior incision line assessed by temperature discrimination test. Results We found no difference in coverage of the posterior or lateral incision lines when comparing LFCN-blocks with 8 mL versus 16 mL of ropivacaine. The blocked area was significantly larger in the 16 mL group, assessed by both temperature discrimination test ( p = 0.012) and mechanical discrimination test ( p = 0.034). We observed no difference between groups regarding quadriceps muscle strength ( p = 1.0). Conclusions A LFCN-block with increased volume of ropivacaine from 8 mL to 16 mL did not result in a greater coverage of posterior or lateral incision lines used for THA, but in a larger blocked sensory area. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03138668 . Registered 3rd of May 2017.

An LFCN block consisting of 8 ml 0.75% ropivacaine had limited coverage of the posterior and lateral incision lines.

No abstract