The comparison between the results of "minimally invasive" and "traditional" total hip replacements is difficult because of numerous reasons, and most of all lack of universally accepted definition, importance of the individual experience on the invasiveness of the surgical approach, patient selection criteria, type of prosthetic device, type of post-operative management, type of rehabilitation, type of surgical approach (single incision with medial, anterior, antero-lateral straight lateral, posterolateral approach and double incision). Obviously, local and general, early or late complications in minimally invasive surgery are the same as in traditional hip replacements. In particular, potential disadvantages of the mini-invasive hip replacements relate to the restricted visual field and to the poor observation of landmarks and vital structures. A careful evaluation of the literature shows two interesting but conflicting features: low complication rate in some series, and high (or extremely high) complication rate in other series. In our series of 74 minimally invasive total hip replacements with a postoperative follow-up of 6 to 42 months, clinical and radiographic results are very favourable and the complication rate was very low, showing that with proper indications, in experienced hands and with a careful technique, complications can be minimized and the results are very promising.
|Translated title of the contribution||Complications of minimally invasive total hip replacements|
|Number of pages||4|
|Journal||Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica|
|Publication status||Published - Aug 2006|
ASJC Scopus subject areas