Dr Sajid Javed, Dr Rana Dawood Ahmad Khan, Dr Atif Ali
Objective: To determine the clinical effectiveness of the mini incision posterior method in comparison with the conventional posterior approach as measured by blood loss, duration of surgery, short-term hip function and other associated complications. Methodology: In this research work, we compared the short-term outcomes of 50 total hip arthroplasty performed through mini incision posterior method with the 42 arthroplasties conducted through conventional posterior approach. There was no important disparity in the 6 distribution, gender, and BMI of the patients of both groups. Results: The average duration of surgery was lesser (99.0 ±26.0minutes versus 123.0 ±30.0 min), and perioperative average loss of blood was also lesser (339.0 ±210.0 versus 422.0 ±177.0 ml) with the application of mini incision approach. There was no important disparity between the groups in average loss of blood after surgical intervention, average inclination angle, hip ratio with good inclination angle and average hip scores after 6 months of surgical intervention. We found the infection in only one female patient of Conventional-Group but there was no patient of infection in the Mini-Group. We found no dislocations or symptomatic pulmonary embolism in any patient of both groups. Conclusion: With the application of the mini incision posterior method, there was reduction in the surgical invasion and the short-term outcomes of this approach were present as good as with the conventional posterior method for total hip arthroplasty. Key Words: Total Hip Arthroplasty’s, Mini Incision Anterior, Posterior, Disparity, Potential.