Abstract
There is a strong drive from industry, patients and the media to offer minimal access hip surgery (MAS) for joint arthroplasty. There is a plethora of definitions, implants, specialist instrumentation and techniques available. Confusion reigns as to the definition, who should offer it, which approach should be used, and what training should be undertaken.
Method : All Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeons in the United Kingdom were sent a simple questionnaire asking for MAS training undertaken, evidence of specialisation, volume of minimal access cases performed, availability of specialist instrumentation, approach used and definition of mimimal access surgery.
Results : 23% of those performing hip arthroplasty had performed MAS. The majority performed between 1–5 cases last year. 41% had observed MAS.
Of those with a specialist interest in hip arthroplasty, 37% had performed MAS.
Of those performing MAS, 83% had observed another surgeon and 60% had attended a course. 29% of consultants intend to perform MAS in the future. The mean and mode quoted length of a regular total hip arthroplasty scar was 15.4 and 15cm respectively. The mean and mode quoted length of a MAS scar was 9.7 and 10 cm respectively.
75% used the miniposterior approach.
Relationships with specialisation, British Hip Society membership and volume breakdown are discussed.
Conclusion: MAS is a popular technique although currently small case numbers are being performed. Given the level of interest in the technique, the definition and training required need to be clarified, and the clinical outcome requires close monitoring to ensure that standards of implantation are not jeopardised.
Editoral Secretary Mr Peter Howard. Correspondence should be addressed to BHS at the Royal College of Surgeons, 35 - 43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PN.
