ABSTRACT
A group of 42 primary total hip arthroplasties performed through an abridged surgical incision (group 1) was prospectively compared to a cohort of 42 primary total hip arthroplasties performed through a standard surgical incision (group 2). The length of the incision was 8.8 +/- 1.5 cm for group 1 and 23.0 +/- 2.1 cm for group 2. The groups were not significantly different with respect to age, height, preoperative Harris Hip scores (HHS), estimated blood loss, or length of hospital stay (P>.05). Group 1 patients had a lower body mass index than group 2 patients (P<.01). Length of surgery was slightly less for group I (P =.02). A 0% incidence was found of infection, nerve palsy, component malposition, and aseptic loosening in both groups. No dislocations occurred in group 1, and one dislocation occurred in group 2. Patients in group 1 have expressed considerable enthusiasm regarding the cosmetic appearance of the surgical incisions, and their postoperative HHS are slightly higher than those of group 2 (P =.042). Total hip arthroplasty can be performed safely and effectively through an abridged surgical incision, but this investigation confirms no dramatic clinical benefit other than cosmetic appeal.
