No clinically significant differences in patient-reported outcome measures across total hip arthroplasty approaches

Abstract

Introduction: As recent studies demonstrate an ongoing debate surrounding outcomes and complications with respect to different total hip arthroplasty (THA) approaches, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may provide valuable information for clinician and patient decision-making. Therefore, our systematic review aimed to assess how surgical approach influences patient-reported outcomes. Methods: 5 online databases were queried for all studies published between January 1, 1997 and March 4, 2022 that reported on PROMs across various surgical approaches to THA. Studies reporting on PROMs in primary THA patients segregated by surgical approach were included. Articles reporting on revision THA, hip resurfacing, and arthroscopy were excluded. Mantel-Haenszel (M-H) models were utilised to calculate the pooled mean difference (MDs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs). Results: No differences between the DAA and other approaches were observed when evaluating HOOS (MD −0.28; 95% CI, −1.98–1.41; p = 0.74), HHS (MD 2.38; 95% CI, −0.27–5.03; p = 0.08), OHS (MD 1.35; 95% CI, −2.00–4.71; p = 0.43), FJS-12 (MD 5.88; 95% CI, −0.36–12.12; p = 0.06), VAS-pain (MD −0.32; 95% CI, −0.68–0.04; p = 0.08), and WOMAC-pain (MD −0.73; 95% CI, −3.85–2.39; p = 0.65) scores. WOMAC (MD 2.47; 95% CI, 0.54–4.40; p = 0.01) and EQ-5D Index (MD 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01–0.06; p = 0.002) scores were found to significantly favour the DAA cohort over the other approaches. Only the EQ-5D index score remained significant following sensitivity analysis. Conclusions: Superiority of any 1 approach could not be concluded based on the mixed findings of the present analysis. Although our pooled analysis found no significant differences in outcomes except for those measured by the EQ-5D index, a few additional metrics, notably the WOMAC, HHS, FJS-12, and VAS-pain scores, leaned in favour of the DAA.