Aim: A selective analysis of the latest literature was carried out including prospective clinical controlled studies on the comparison between minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty (MIS) and the conventional technique.
Methods: An online data base search for controlled study designs within the last 3 years (2009-2011) which compared MIS with standard procedures was performed. Data such as operation time, blood loss, Harris hip score, complications and implant positioning were compared.
Results: A total of 11 studies which compared the results of 387 MISs and 264 operations on hips with the standard technique were analyzed. In the majority of the studies reduced levels of creatine kinase and myoglobin as well as reduced intraoperative blood loss were reported. In the early postoperative period up to postoperative week 6 significant advantages in the Harris hip score were reported for the MIS patients. Postoperative complications and implant positioning were comparable in both groups. The operation time was significantly longer in the MIS group for some studies.
Conclusions: Minimally invasive techniques in total hip arthroplasty are nowadays no longer seen as just cosmetically attractive but rather as a real improvement for the clinical outcome. In this respect prospective clinically controlled studies within the last 3 years showed advantages in the early postoperative period.