Direct and indirect comparisons in network meta-analysis of SuperPATH, direct anterior and posterior approaches in total hip arthroplasty

A comparison of the clinical efficacy of total hip arthroplasty via direct anterior approach and posterior approach: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The approach of total hip arthroplasty (THA) has long been controversial, and many studies have compared different approaches. However, there is still a lack of consistent conclusions and comprehensive, systematic comparisons and evaluations.

METHODS

This study retrieved 7 databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database. The search time ranged from the establishment of each database to November 1, 2023. Data analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4, and outcome was presented as the weighed mean difference for continuous data and risk/odds ratio for dichotomous data. We used the Mantel-Haneszel method and random effects model to obtain the overall effects of the differences in the impact of 2 surgical methods on clinical outcomes in all included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 33 articles were included in this study, including 14478 participants, 4911 participants in DAA group and 9567 participants in PA group. The visual analogue scale scores of the DAA group at 1 day and 2 days after THA were significantly lower than those of the PA group (mean difference [MD] = -0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.83 to -0.30, P < .01) at 1 day and (MD = -0.67, 95% CI: -1.16 to -0.17, P = .01) at 2 days. The risk of intraoperative fracture (odds ratio = 2.18, 95% CI: 1.11-4.29, P = .05) and lateral femoral nerve injury (risk ratio = 7.84, 95% CI: 1.69-36.42, P < .01) in the DAA group was significantly higher than that of the PA group. The number of prostheses in the Lewinnek safe zone of the DAA group was significantly higher than that of the PA group (risk ratio = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.00-1.27, P = .05). The results showed no significant difference between the DAA group and the PA group in the time to stop using walking aids, dislocation rate, groin pain, incision complications, heterotopic ossification, intraoperative blood loss, and acetabular anterior (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the PA group, patients in the DAA group showed more ideal anatomical and imaging results, shorter hospital stay, and showing advantages in postoperative pain, but with a higher incidence of intraoperative complications.

Indirect comparisons of traction table versus standard table in total hip arthroplasty through direct anterior approach: a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether the use of an orthopaedic traction table (TT) in direct anterior approach (DAA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) results in better outcomes. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis was to compare the THA outcomes through DAA on a standard operating table and the THA outcomes through DAA on a TT.

METHODS

PubMed, Epistemonikos, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to 01 January 2024. An indirect comparison in network meta-analysis was performed to assess treatment effects between DAA on a TT and DAA on a standard table, using fixed-effects and random-effects models estimated with frequentist approach and consistency assumption. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for continuous variables and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were estimated for binary variables.

RESULTS

The systematic review of the literature identified 43 RCTs with a total of 2,258 patients. DAA with TT had a 102.3 mL higher intraoperative blood loss and a 0.6 mmol/L lower Hb 3 days postoperatively compared with DAA without TT (SMD = 102.33, 95% CI 47.62 to 157.04; SMD = - 0.60, 95% CI  - 1.19 to - 0.00). DAA with TT had a 0.15 lower periprosthetic fracture OR compared with DAA without TT (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.86). There were no further significant differences in surgical, radiological, functional outcomes and in complication rates.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings and taking into account the limitations, we recommend that particular attention be paid to the risk of periprosthetic fracture in DAA on a standard operating table and blood loss in DAA with TT. Since numerous other surgical, radiological, functional outcome parameters and other complication rates studied showed no significant difference between DAA on a standard operating table and DAA with TT, no recommendation for a change in surgical technique seems justified.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I evidence, because this is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Which approach of total hip arthroplasty is the best efficacy and least complication?

BACKGROUND

Total hip arthroplasty is as an effective intervention to relieve pain and improve hip function. Approaches of the hip have been exhaustively explored about pros and cons. The efficacy and the complications of hip approaches remains inconclusive. This study conducted an umbrella review to systematically appraise previous meta-analysis (MAs) including conventional posterior approach (PA), and minimally invasive surgeries as the lateral approach (LA), direct anterior approach (DAA), 2-incisions method, mini-lateral approach and the newest technique direct superior approach (DSA) or supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPath).

AIM

To compare the efficacy and complications of hip approaches that have been published in all MAs and randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

MAs were identified from MEDLINE and Scopus from inception until 2023. RCTs were then updated from the latest MA to September 2023. This study included studies which compared hip approaches and reported at least one outcome such as Harris Hip Score (HHS), dislocation, intra-operative fracture, wound complication, nerve injury, operative time, operative blood loss, length of hospital stay, incision length and VAS pain. Data were independently selected, extracted and assessed by two reviewers. Network MA and cluster rank and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) were estimated for treatment efficacy and safety.

RESULTS

Finally, twenty-eight MAs (40 RCTs), and 13 RCTs were retrieved. In total 47 RCTs were included for reanalysis. The results of corrected covered area showed high degree (13.80%). Among 47 RCTs, most of the studies were low risk of bias in part of random process and outcome reporting, while other domains were medium to high risk of bias. DAA significantly provided higher HHS at three months than PA [pooled unstandardized mean difference (USMD): 3.49, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98, 6.00 with SUCRA: 85.9], followed by DSA/SuperPath (USMD: 1.57, 95%CI: -1.55, 4.69 with SUCRA: 57.6). All approaches had indifferent dislocation and intraoperative fracture rates. SUCRA comparing early functional outcome and composite complications (dislocation, intra-operative fracture, wound complication, and nerve injury) found DAA was the best approach followed by DSA/SuperPath.

CONCLUSION

DSA/SuperPath had better earlier functional outcome than PA, but still could not overcome the result of DAA. This technique might be the other preferred option with acceptable complications.

Hemiarthroplasty through SuperPATH versus hemiarthroplasty through conventional approaches in patients with femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aim was to conduct a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short-term outcomes of bipolar hemiarthroplasty (HA) through SuperPATH and bipolar HA through conventional approaches (CAs) in patients with femoral neck fractures. The following PICO question was formulated: In human participants with femoral neck fractures, are the short-term outcomes of SuperPATH HA better than the short-term outcomes of CAs HA? The following databases were searched until 25 August 2023: PubMed, CNKI, CENTRAL of The Cochrane Library, Clinical trials, and Google Scholar. Quality assessment of the RCTs was performed, according to the Cochrane's Risk of Bias 2 tool and the recommendations of the GRADE system. Furthermore, we evaluated publication bias with funnel plots. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for continuous variables using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method and a random effects model. Nine RCTs with overall 762 patients were included in this meta-analysis. All 9 RCTs were rated with a moderate risk of bias. The quality of evidence of the outcome parameters was rated moderate to very low. The funnel plots were overall broadly symmetrical, possibly indicating low to moderate publication bias. SuperPATH had a longer operation time compared to CAs (MD = 21.79, 95% CI 12.57 to 31.02). SuperPATH decreased incision length (MD = - 4.50; 95% CI - 5.80 to - 3.20), intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 103.96, 95% CI - 150.27 to - 55.66), postoperative drainage volume (MD = - 137.30, 95% CI - 178.74 to - 95.86), time to mobilization (MD = - 3.86; 95% CI - 5.96 to - 1.76), pain VAS ≤ 1 week postoperatively (MD = - 1.81; 95% CI - 2.17 to - 1.45), and hospitalization time (MD = - 4.05; 95% CI - 4.96 to - 3.15). SuperPATH improved HHS ≤ 1 week postoperatively (MD = 11.10; 95% CI 1.65 to 20.54) and HHS 3 months postoperatively (MD = 6.33; 95% CI 3.97 to 8.69). There was no difference in pain VAS 1-3 months postoperatively (MD = - 0.08; 95% CI - 0.22 to 0.05) and HHS 6 months postoperatively (MD = 0.44; 95% CI - 0.11 to 1.00). This is the first meta-analysis comparing SuperPATH HA with CAs HA in patients with femoral neck fractures. SuperPATH HA was superior in the early short-term functional outcome (HHS) compared to CAs HA, reaching minimal clinically important differences. Furthermore, SuperPATH HA showed significantly better results in incision length, blood loss, time to mobilization, pain intensity (VAS), and hospitalization time than CAs HA.

SuperPATH-Current Status of Evidence and Further Investigations: A Scoping Review and Quality Assessment

BACKGROUND

SuperPATH is a novel minimally invasive technique for hip replacement that is gaining increasing attention. The aim of this review was to determine the nature, extent, and quality of current research evidence on SuperPATH and to identify areas for further investigations.

METHODS

A bibliometric search was conducted in PubMed up to 1 August 2023 using the search term "SuperPATH". Data extraction and quality assessment were performed for relevant articles.

RESULTS

The bibliometric search yielded 51 articles on SuperPATH, 9 of which were meta-analyses, 11 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 4 were prospective non-RCTs, 12 were retrospective comparative studies, 11 were case series, and 4 were other article types. Most articles were published between 2015 and 2023, with a steady increase in publications per year. The articles originated from 13 countries, of which China was the most productive (35%). The quality assessment of the meta-analyses showed that 22.2% were of moderate quality, 66.7% were of low quality, and 11.1% were of critically low quality. The quality assessment of the RCTs showed that 36.4% had a low risk of bias (RoB), 27.2% revealed some concerns, and 36.4% had a high RoB. All studies were evaluated for content and taken into account in the formulation of recommendations and conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

The SuperPATH evidence varies from low to high quality. There is a steady increase in SuperPATH publications in the English-language literature and an uneven distribution of the article origins, with most articles coming from China. Consistent terminology should be used in the future, referring to the surgical approach as the direct superior approach (DSA) and to the surgical technique as SuperPATH. This review provides further concrete suggestions for future investigations and recommendations to improve study quality.