Article

What is the role of minimally invasive surgery in a fast track hip and knee replacement pathway?

Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England (Impact Factor: 1.33). 04/2012; 94(3):148-51. DOI: 10.1308/003588412X13171221590214
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Minimally invasive hip and knee replacement surgery (MIS) continues to receive coverage in both the popular press and scientific literature. The cited benefits include a smaller scar, less soft tissue trauma, faster recovery, reduced hospital stay, decreased blood loss and reduced post-operative pain. These outcomes are highly desirable and consistent with the aims of fast track hip and knee pathways. This paper evaluates the literature and discusses whether performing MIS over conventional surgical techniques offers advantages in a fast track hip and knee pathway.
An English language literature search was performed using the MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Case series, randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews were included in the review.
The reported improvements in recovery brought about by MIS must be considered multifactorial. In combination with improved clinical pathways, MIS can be associated with quicker recovery and shorter length of hospital stay.
There is insufficient evidence to indicate that surgical technique alone makes a significant difference to recovery or reduces soft tissue trauma. No consensus on whether to use MIS techniques in fast track hip and knee replacement pathways can therefore be drawn. This is especially important given that the complication rates of MIS in the low to medium volume surgeon appear unacceptably high compared with standard approaches. It is also too early to assess the long-term effects of MIS on implant survival.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
94 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The increasing numbers of patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA), combined with the rapidly growing repertoire of surgical techniques and interventions available have put considerable pressure on surgeons and other healthcare professionals to produce excellent results with early functional recovery and short hospital stays. The current economic climate and the restricted healthcare budgets further necessitate brief hospitalization while minimizing costs. Clinical pathways and protocols introduced to achieve these goals include a variety of peri-operative interventions to fulfill patient expectations and achieve the desired outcomes. In this review, we present an evidence-based summary of common interventions available to achieve enhanced recovery, reduce hospital stay, and improve functional outcomes following THA and TKA. It covers pre-operative patient education and nutrition, pre-emptive analgesia, neuromuscular electrical stimulation, pulsed electromagnetic fields, peri-operative rehabilitation, modern wound dressings, standard surgical techniques, minimally invasive surgery, and fast-track arthroplasty units.
    BMC Medicine 02/2013; 11(1):37. · 7.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A minimally invasive anterior approach (MIS) was compared to a standard lateral approach in primary total hip arthroplasty. Clinical and radiological outcomes were analyzed 6 weeks, 12 weeks, one year and two years after surgery. The duration of surgery was longer, mobility one week after surgery was better and time of hospitalization was shorter for minimally invasive-treated patients. They had less pain during movement, limping, better Harris Hip Score and satisfaction after 6 weeks, which remained after 12 weeks and 1 year, but not after two years. There were two deep infections in the MIS group. Radiological results were not affected. The infections might be a point of concern, but there were no other disadvantages of the MIS approach. In fact, early rehabilitation was facilitated and clinical results were improved. Our results encourage the continuous use of the MIS anterior approach instead of the lateral approach.
    Orthopedic Reviews 11/2013; 5(4):e31.