BackgroundGiven the increasing demand for tissue-sparing surgery, the surgical approach is the subject of lively debate in total hip replacement. The aim of this paper is to compare the efficacy of the minimally invasive direct anterior approach and the standard lateral approach to total hip replacement surgery by observing intra- and perioperative outcomes.Materials and methodsThe authors conducted a retrospective study on a group of 419 consecutive patients undergoing total hip replacement for coxarthrosis. The patients were divided into a first group (A) of 198 patients who had surgery with the standard lateral approach, and a second control group (B) of 221 patients who had the same procedure via the minimally invasive direct anterior approach. Assessment of the two groups considered the following perioperative parameters: length of the surgical procedure, intraoperative complications, intra- and postoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, length of stay, and type of discharge.ResultsThe two groups were homogeneous when compared in relation to mean age, sex and body weight. The minimally invasive direct anterior approach was performed within an acceptable time (89 ± 19 min vs. 81 ± 15 min) and with modest blood loss (3.1 ± 0.9 g/dL vs. 3,5 ± 1 g/dL). Patients experienced less pain (1.4 ± 1.5 NRS score vs. 2.5 ± 2 NRS score), and PONV affected only 5% versus 10% of cases. Times to discharge were shorter (7 ± 2 days vs. 10 ± 3.5 days), and 58.4% versus 11.6% of patients were discharged to home.ConclusionsIn our study, patients treated with a minimally invasive direct anterior approach had a better perioperative outcome than patients treated with the lateral approach. The longer time of surgery for the minimally invasive direct anterior approach may be attributed to the learning curve. Further studies are necessary to investigate the advantages of a minimally invasive direct anterior approach in terms of clinical results in the short and long run.

The subcutaneous rupture of the Achilles tendon is a frequently observed lesion. Its treatment, however, remains controversial. The treatment to be applied varies between the conservative method, open surgical procedure and percutaneous or minimally invasive techniques. While conservative treatment results in a high percentage of re-ruptures, the open surgical treatment also has its complications. Surgical wound dehiscence, delayed cutaneous healing due to infection, delayed weight-bearing capacity, and consequent hypertrophic scarring account for 4-19% of all complications. The need for a technique that minimizes these complications has led to the development of percutaneous techniques. From August 2005 to March 2009, 35 consecutive patients underwent reparative surgery of the Achilles tendon using a minimally invasive technique with the Achillon device. All patients were available for follow-up. Dynamometric evaluation was possible on 15 patients. Twenty-five patients reported being very satisfied and 10 as being satisfied. The average AOFAS score was 93.4 (range 88-100 points). No complications occurred as a result of surgery (re-rupture, infection, lesion of the sural nerve, wound complication). All patients returned to work within 2 months, to jogging within 3 months, and to their previous level of sporting activity within 6 months. The authors believe that the minimally invasive technique using the Achillon device is a reliable surgical treatment and provides satisfactory results with a low rate of complication.

No abstract

The Authors present their experience in the surgical treatment of Morton's neuroma via a dorsal approach. The assessed results have been very good in terms of a clear clinical improvement and no recurrences in all the treated cases. The histological examination carried out on all the removed samples have shown that the thickening of the nerve first occurs due to perineural fibrosis and successively associated with sclerohyalinosis of the tissue, which is in line with the already existing literature reports. The Authors of the article reckon the adopted surgical technique to be simple, safe and highly effective.