Estudio de cohortes comparativo del abordaje Superpath con abordaje convencional posterior en cirugía protésica primaria de cadera no cementada: curva de aprendizaje y resultados a corto plazo

Martínez, Jesús Más; Sanz-Reig, J.; Morales-Santías, M.; Puga, David Bustamante Suarez de; Roman, Carmen Verdu; Giménez, E. Martínez

doi:10.1016/j.recot.2019.04.002

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have also pointed to a longer operative time compared to the conventional posterior approach, with values between 69.6 minutes and 143.7 minutes, and a systematic review with data on 630 patients, that showed that superpath was on average 18.4 minutes longer than conventional posterior approach. 12,[13][14][15][16][17] So, the average time recorded in our study is within this range.…”

Section: Time Of Surgerymentioning

confidence: 70%

“…This score was only evaluated before surgery and after one month of surgery, and did not reveal differences, however, in the literature, more favorable results are described for the superpath approach after 7 postoperative days where a metaanalysis found that in 246 patients (121 from superpath and 125 from conventional approach) the superpath group obtained results 10.2 points higher in the Harris hip score than the conventional group after 7 days. 14 In current work, we performed two physical tests; the "30 seconds sit to stand test" and the "20-meter walk test" for functional evaluation. Both tests validated in the literature regarding their reliability for functional assessment in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty.…”

Section: Functional Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in our study, when analyzing some radiological parameters, we found that in fact the results obtained were consistent in the 11 patients submitted to the superpath approach, similar to those obtained by the posterior approach and within the values considered ideal in the literature. 14…”

Section: Radiological Parametersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of short-term outcomes between minimal invasive superpath approach and conventional posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

Branco

Sousa

et al. 2021

Int J Res Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The objective of current study was to compare the short-term outcomes between a cohort of patients that undergone total hip replacement by a superpath technique at the beginning of the surgeon's learning curve, and a cohort of patients that undergone a total hip replacement by a conventional posterior approach.Methods: A cohort of 22 patients was prospectively and randomly selected for being part of a superpath approach group or a conventional posterior approach group. Clinical evaluation was performed in two primary end-points - the third post-operative day and the first month after surgery - using physical exams as the “20 meter walking test” and the “30 seconds sit to stand test”, the Harris hip score, the visual analogue scale for pain. Radiological evaluation was also performed.Results: 11 patients underwent the superpath approach and 11 patients underwent the conventional posterior approach. The surgery time was 78.2 min in the superpath group and 59.4 min in the posterior group. The average hospital stay was 3.4 days in the superpath group and 5.3 days in the posterior group. When assessing pain improvement through VAS, it was found that both on the third postoperative day and on the first postoperative month, patients in the superpath group showed greater improvement. There were no differences in functional results with statistical significance. No complications were seen in both groups.Conclusions: Despite the longer surgical time seen with the superpath approach, it managed to significantly decrease the length of hospital stay and obtained better results in improving pain in the short term.

show abstract

Section: Time Of Surgerymentioning

confidence: 70%

Section: Functional Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of short-term outcomes between minimal invasive superpath approach and conventional posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

Branco

Sousa

et al. 2021

Int J Res Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…В 2011 г. были представлены первые результаты применения хирургической техники SuperPATH, которая была разработана J. Chow (MicroPort Orthopedics Inc., Arlington, TN, USA) [27]. SuperPATH представляет собой комбинацию отдельных аспектов таких техник, как SuperCap/ direct superior и PATH [27]. Доступ производится в надвертельной области через волокна большой ягодичной мышцы в обход илиотибиального тракта.…”

Section: Superpathunclassified

Minimally Invasive Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty: Systematic Review

Корыткин

Герасимов

Ковалдов

et al. 2021

Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. Main objective of total hip replacement (THR) is fast recovery of hip joint function and patient’s return to daily routines. Use of minimally invasive approaches (MIA) may help achieving set objective. The purpose of the study was to analyze and compare MIA in THR.Materials and methods. Databases of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Systematic Reviews, Google Scholar and E-library were searched for the period since 2000 to 2020. 55 scientific articles were selected for the analysis. Publications contain results of studies of MIA, such as Direct Anterior Approach (DAA), Micro-Hip (MH), Röttinger (R), Mini-posterior (MP), Direct Superior Approach (DSA), SuperCap (SC), PATH (P), SuperPATH (SP). The initial data were combined and underwent statistical processing.Results. A comparative analysis of MIA couldn’t identify superiority of any approach. Blood loss, length of hospital stay, functional outcomes (Harris Hip Score) at 3 and 12 months didn’t differ between the groups. Significant differences were found in the operation time between DSA and SP. Acetabular inclination was different between some approaches. Cup inclination in R and DSA, cup anteversion in DAA, MH and SP slightly exceeded Lewinnek's «safe zone». Recurrent dislocation, periprosthetic fractures, damage to the lateral cutaneous nerve are the most frequent postoperative complications.Conclusion: THR can be done using a variety of surgical approaches. The choice of approach relies on surgeon’s experience and personal preferences. Minimally invasive approaches have the advantage of short-term recovery due to the preservation of soft tissues.

show abstract

[Retracted] A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the SuperPATH Approach in Hip Arthroplasty

Chen

et al. 2021

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To compare the clinical and radiographic results of the supercapsular percutaneously assisted total hip (SuperPATH) approach and the conventional approach in hip arthroplasty. Design. Based on a prepublished protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42020177717), we searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for relevant literatures up to January 30, 2021. The methodological qualities were assessed using the guidelines provided by the Cochrane Collaboration for Systematic Reviews. Randomized- or fixed-effect models were used to calculate the weighted mean difference (WMD) or odds ratio (OR), respectively, for continuous and dichotomous variables. Results. 6 articles were included in the study, and 526 patients were selected, which included 233 cases in the SuperPATH groups and 279 cases in the conventional groups, and 4 cases performed two surgeries in succession. The SuperPATH group demonstrated shorter incision length ( WMD = − 7.87 , 95% CI (−10.05, −5.69), P < 0.00001 ), decreased blood transfusion rate ( OR = 0.48 , 95% CI (0.25, 0.89), P = 0.02 ), decreased visual analogue scale (VAS) ( WMD = − 0.40 , 95% CI (−0.72, −0.08), P = 0.02 ), and higher Harris hip score (HHS) ( WMD = 1.98 , 95% CI (0.18, 3.77), P = 0.03 ) than the conventional group. However, there was no difference in VAS ( P = 0.14 ) and HHS ( P = 0.86 ) between the two groups 3 months later, nor in the acetabular abduction angle ( P = 0.32 ) in either group. Conclusions. SuperPATH, as a minimally invasive approach with its reduced tissue damage, quick postoperative recovery, and early rehabilitation, demonstrates the short-term advantages of hip arthroplasty. As the evidences in favor of the SuperPATH technique were limited in a small number of studies and short duration of follow-up, more research is required to further analyze its long-term effect.

show abstract

Estudio de cohortes comparativo del abordaje Superpath con abordaje convencional posterior en cirugía protésica primaria de cadera no cementada: curva de aprendizaje y resultados a corto plazo

Cited by 5 publications

References 18 publications

Comparison of short-term outcomes between minimal invasive superpath approach and conventional posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

Comparison of short-term outcomes between minimal invasive superpath approach and conventional posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

Minimally Invasive Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty: Systematic Review

[Retracted] A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of the SuperPATH Approach in Hip Arthroplasty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About