header advert
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Get Access locked padlock

Hip

Conventional versus lateral fasciotomy for prevention of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve injury in the non-fan-type nerve in total hip arthroplasty with direct anterior approach

a prospective randomized controlled trial



Download PDF

Abstract

Aims

Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) injury is a potential complication after the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty (DAA-THA). The aim of this study was to determine how the location of the fasciotomy in DAA-THA affects LFCN injury.

Methods

In this trial, 134 patients were randomized into a lateral fasciotomy (n = 67) or a conventional fasciotomy (n = 67) group. This study was a dual-centre, double-blind, prospective randomized controlled two-arm trial with parallel group design and a 1:1 allocation ratio. The primary endpoint was the presence of LFCN injury, which was determined by the presence of numbness, decreased sensation, tingling, jolt-like sensation, or pain over the lateral aspect of the thigh, excluding the surgical scar, using a patient-based questionnaire. The secondary endpoints were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ), and the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12). Assessments were obtained three months after surgery.

Results

The incidence of LFCN injury tended to be lower in the lateral fasciotomy group (p = 0.089). In the lateral fasciotomy group, there were no significant differences in the mean PROM scores between patients with and without LFCN injury (FJS-12: 54.42 (SD 15.77) vs 65.06 (SD 26.14); p = 0.074; JHEQ: 55.21 (SD 12.10) vs 59.72 (SD 16.50); p = 0.288; WOMAC: 82.45 (SD 6.84) vs 84.40 (SD 17.91); p = 0.728). In the conventional fasciotomy group, there were significant differences in FJS-12 and JHEQ between patients with and without LFCN injury (FJS-12: 43.21 (SD 23.08) vs 67.28 (SD 20.47); p < 0.001; JHEQ: 49.52 (SD 13.97) vs 59.59 (SD 15.18); p = 0.012); however, there was no significant difference in WOMAC (76.63 (SD 16.81) vs 84.16 (SD 15.94); p = 0.107).

Conclusion

The incidence of LFCN injury at three months after THA was comparable between the lateral and conventional fasciotomy groups. Further studies are needed to assess the long-term effects of these approaches.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(12):1252–1258.


Correspondence should be sent to Tomonori Baba. E-mail:

For access options please click here