Zusammenfassung
Hintergrund
Ziel minimal-invasiver Zugänge in der Hüftendoprothetik ist die Verringerung des Operationstraumas ohne Einschränkungen der Exposition von Femur und Azetabulum zur Gewährleistung einer reproduzierbaren Implantation. Trotz zunehmend verbesserter Instrumentation ist die Etablierung dieses Vorgehens in der Lernphase mit dem Risiko einer erhöhten Komplikationsrate verbunden.
Ziel der Arbeit
Die vorliegende Arbeit stellt spezifische und unspezifische Komplikationen nach minimal-invasiver Implantation einer Hüfttotalendoprothese (HTEP) dar und beschreibt Hinweise zu deren Vermeidung.
Material und Methoden
Es handelt sich um ein retrospektives Studiendesign. Bei 152 Revisionsoperationen nach minimal-invasiver HTEP-Implantation wurden eine Nachuntersuchung und eine Fehleranalyse durchgeführt.
Ergebnisse
Von den Patienten der 152 Revisionsoperationen waren 87 weiblich und 65 männlich. Eine genderspezifische Komplikationshäufigkeit konnte nicht festgestellt werden. Die häufigste Indikation zur Wechseloperation wurde aufgrund rezidivierender Luxationen gestellt. Nach anterolateralem Zugang in Rückenlage ergab sich eine größere Häufigkeit von Frakturen des Trochanter major.
Diskussion
Die minimal-invasive Implantation führt nur bei korrekter Technik zu sehr guten Ergebnissen. Vom muskelschonenden Aspekt des minimal-invasiven Zugangs profitieren besonders junge Patienten. Dieses Patientenkollektiv hat ein hohes Risiko, einem Revisionseingriff unterzogen werden zu müssen.
Abstract
Background
The goal of minimally invasive surgery in total hip arthroplasty (MIS-THA) is reduction of surgical trauma without any limitations regarding exposure of the femur and acetabulum to achieve reproducible results. Despite improved instrumentation the implementation of these techniques is associated with a risk of higher complication rates.
Aim
The article describes specific and unspecific complications of MIS-THA and gives hints and tips on how to avoid them.
Material and methods
In a retrospective study 152 THA revisions following MIS-THA were examined and an error analysis was performed.
Results
The study of 152 MIS-THA revisions included 87 female and 65 male patients. A gender-specific incidence of complications could not be found. The most common indication for revision surgery was due to recurrent dislocation. An increased incidence of fractures of the greater trochanter was observed using the anterolateral approach with the patient in a supine position.
Discussion
The MIS-THA procedure contributes to excellent early rehabilitation when performed correctly. The muscle preserving aspect can be counted as an advantage particularly for young patients. This patient collective has a high risk to undergo revision surgery.
Literatur
Bal BS, Haltom D, Aleto T, Barrett M (2005) Early complications of primary total hip replacement performed with a two-incision minimally invasive technique. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 87(11):2432–2438
Bal BS, Haltom D, Aleto T, Barrett M (2006) Early complications of primary total hip replacement performed with a two-incision minimally invasive technique. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 88(Suppl 1 Pt 2):221–233
Battaglia TC, Mulhall KJ, Brown TE, Saleh KJ (2006) Increased surgical volume is associated with lower THA dislocation rates. Clin Orthop Relat Res 447:28–33
Bertin KC, Röttinger H (2004) Anterolateral mini-incision hip replacement surgery: a modified Watson-Jones approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res 429:248–255
Berger RA, Jacobs JJ, Meneghini RM et al (2004) Rapid rehabilitation and recovery with minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 429:239–247
Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E et al (2009) The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 91(1):128–133
Dorr LD, Maheshwari AV, Long WT et al (2007) Early pain relief and function after posterior minimally invasive and conventional total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, randomized, blinded study. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 89(6):1153–1160
Graw BP, Woolson ST, Huddleston HG et al (2010) Minimal incision surgery as a risk factor for early failure of total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(9):2372–2376
Hartzband MA (2004) Posterolateral minimal incision for total hip replacement: technique and early results. Orthop Clin North Am 35(2):119–129
Howell JR, Masri BA, Duncan CP (2004) Minimally invasive versus standard incision anterolateral hip replacement: a comparative study. Orthop Clin North Am 35(2):153–162
Laffosse JM, Chiron P, Molinier F et al (2007) Prospective and comparative study of the anterolateral mini-invasive approach versus minimally invasive posterior approach for primary total hip replacement. Early results. Int Orthop 31(5):597–603
Matta JM, Ferguson TA (2005) The anterior approach for hip replacement. Orthopedics 28(9):927–928
Meneghini RM, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Hozack WJ (2006) Muscle damage during MIS total hip arthroplasty: Smith-Petersen versus posterior approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res 453:293–298
McGrory BJ, Finch ME, Furlong PJ, Ruterbories J (2008) Incision length correlates with patient weight, height, and gender when using a minimal-incision technique in total hip arthroplasty. J Surg Orthop Adv 17(2):77–81
Ogonda L, Wilson R, Archbold P et al (2005) A minimal-incision technique in total hip arthroplasty does not improve early postoperative outcomes. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 87(4):701–710
Parratte S, Pagnano MW (2008) Muscle damage during minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: cadaver-based evidence that it is significant. Instr Course Lect 57:231–234
Parvizi J, Sharkey PF, Pour AE et al (2006) Hip arthroplasty with minimally invasive surgery: a survey comparing the opinion of highly qualified experts vs patients. J Arthroplasty 21(6 Suppl 2):38–46
Smith TO, Blake V, Hing CB (2010) Minimally invasive versus conventional exposure for total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes. Int Orthop 35(2):173–184
Szendrõi M, Sztrinkai G, Vass R, Kiss J (2006) The impact of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty on the standard procedure. Int Orthop 30(3):167–171
Roth P von, Olivier M, Preininger B et al (2011) BMI and gender do not influence surgical accuracy during minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 21(6):688–693
Wan Z, Boutary M, Dorr LD (2008) The influence of acetabular component position on wear in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 23(1):51–56
Wohlrab D, Hagel A, Hein W (2004) Advantages of minimal invasive total hip replacement in the early phase of rehabilitation. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 142:685–690
Woo RY, Morrey BF (1982) Dislocations after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 64(9):1295–1306
Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien
Interessenkonflikt. R. Hube, M. Dienst, P. von Roth geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hube, R., Dienst, M. & von Roth, P. Komplikationen nach minimal-invasiver Hüftendoprothetik. Orthopäde 43, 47–53 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-013-2123-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-013-2123-z
Schlüsselwörter
- Operationstrauma
- Hüfttotalendoprothese (HTEP)
- Revisionsoperationen
- Rezidivierende Luxationen
- Anterolateraler Zugang