Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 12, 2026
Individualized Stem-positioning in Calcar-guided Short-stem Total Hip Arthroplasty
Published on: February 27, 2018
Mini-incision technique for total hip arthroplasty with navigation
Anthony M DiGioia1, Anton Y Plakseychuk, Timothy J Levison
1Institute for Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery, The Western Pennsylvania Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15242, USA.
This prospective study compares a mini-incision technique and traditional posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Thirty-three patients who had undergone a mini-incision THA were matched by diagnosis, gender, average age, and preoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS) to 33 patients who had undergone THA using the traditional posterior approach. The average length of the incision for group 1 was 11.7 cm (range, 7.3-13.0) and for group 2 was 20.2 cm (range, 14.8-26.0). At the 3-month follow-up, patients in the mini-incision group had significant improvement in limp (P<.05) and ability to climb stairs (P <.01) compared with the traditional group. At the 6 month follow-up, the mini-incision group was significantly better in terms of limp (P <.05), distance walked (P<.001), and stairs (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups for pain, function, or range of motion at the 1-year follow-up examination.
This prospective study compares a mini-incision technique and traditional posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Thirty-three patients who had undergone a mini-incision THA were matched by diagnosis, gender, average age, and preoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS) to 33 patients who had undergone THA using the traditional posterior approach. The average length of the incision for group 1 was 11.7 cm (range, 7.3-13.0) and for group 2 was 20.2 cm (range, 14.8-26.0). At the 3-month follow-up, patients in the mini-incision group had significant improvement in limp (P<.05) and ability to climb stairs (P <.01) compared with the traditional group. At the 6 month follow-up, the mini-incision group was significantly better in terms of limp (P <.05), distance walked (P<.001), and stairs (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups for pain, function, or range of motion at the 1-year follow-up examination.
