Minimally Invasive Hip Replacement: Separating Fact from Fiction

Abstract

Total hip arthroplasty is one of the most successful procedures introduced in the twentieth century. Hip surgery performed through a small incision has been widely promoted [1]. Although minimally invasive surgery (MIS) total hip replacement has been greeted with enthusiasm by those wishing to embrace the technique; others have voiced concern or even scepticism. Those extolling the virtue of the minimally invasive approach tout the potential benefits, such as reduced soft tissue trauma, reduced postoperative pain, and quicker rehabilitation. Sceptics of minimally invasive hip arthroplasty are concerned by increased operative difficulty, reduced visualization of the operative landmarks, the increased risk of complications, and the obvious downside of a learning curve associated with the introduction of new techniques. The question remains “Are minimally invasive hip arthroplasties safe and as efficacious as conventional hip replacements?” To date, there has been widespread marketing both to surgeons and to the public about the proposed merits of MIS techniques, but few objective data have been published on this topic. This chapter reviews the technique and published literature to delineate the advantages and pitfalls of performing minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty surgery.