The mini-incision posterior approach may appeal to surgeons comfortable with the standard posterior approach to the hip. We present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of these two approaches. Twelve randomised controlled trials and four non-randomised trials comprising of 1498 total hip arthroplasties were included. The mini-incision posterior approach was associated with an early improvement in Harris hip score of 1.8 points (P < 0.001), reduced operating time (5 minutes, P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (14 hours, P < 0.001), intraoperative and total blood loss (63 ml, P < 0.001 and 119 ml, P < 0.001 respectively). There were no statistically significant differences on the incidence of dislocation, nerve injury, infection or venous thromboembolic events. The minimally invasive posterior approach appears to provide a safe and acceptable alternative to the standard incision posterior approach.
The subvastus approach has potential early advantages over the medial parapatellar approach because it avoids disruption of the quadriceps tendon. We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the functional outcomes and complications associated with these two approaches. Following an extensive search of prospective trials published in any language before 1st August 2014, studies were screened in duplicate according to pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Sixteen randomised controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis comprising of 1,711 total knee replacements. Knee society score and range of movement were significantly superior in the subvastus group at early and one-year follow up. The subvastus approach was also associated with a statistically significant reduction in the requirement for intraoperative lateral release, perioperative blood loss, visual analogue score for pain on day 1 post operatively, and the number of days to achieve active straight leg raising. Both tourniquet time and total operative time were increased for the subvastus approach. There was no statistically significant difference in complications such as stiffness requiring MUA, superficial and deep infection and deep vein thrombosis. The subvastus approach confers a functional advantage over the medial parapatellar approach to the knee which lasts for a minimum of one year postoperatively.