MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407040904 · doi:10.1186/s12891-024-08271-7

Direct superior approach versus posterolateral approach in mid-term clinical outcomes of total hip arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled study

2025· article· en· W4407040904 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhanqi Wei, Yiming Xu, Wei Zhu, Xisheng Weng, Bin Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeking Union Medical College HospitalChinese Academy of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicineWOMACRandomized controlled trialSurgeryOsteoarthritisTotal hip arthroplastyOrthopedic surgeryVisual analogue scaleProspective cohort studyHarris Hip Score

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to compare mid-term clinical outcome of direct superior approach (DSA) and posterolateral approach (PLA) in THA. METHOD: Seventy-eight patients who underwent THA from January 2021 to June 2021 were prospectively enrolled and randomly allocated into DSA group and PLA group. The surgical duration, incision length, total blood loss, ambulation time, visual analogue scale (VAS), patient satisfaction, Harris hip score (HHS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) score, postoperative leg length discrepancy (LLD), abduction angle, anteversion angle and complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Thirty three patients were randomized to the PLA group and 32 patients allocated to the DSA group. The average follow-up period was 39.8 months in DSA group and 40.1 months in PLA group. Compared with PLA group, DSA group had longer surgical duration ([124.1 ± 11.2] min vs. [103.3 ± 20.7] min), less total blood loss ([482.4 ± 236.1] ml vs. [680.2 ± 299.4] ml), shorter incision ([8.7 ± 1.9] cm vs. [15.6 ± 1.7] cm), and earlier ambulation time ([15.8 ± 4.0] h vs. [20.5 ± 3.5] h), with statistically significant differences (P < 0.0001). Furthermore, the DSA group had significantly lower WOMAC Scores compared to the PLA group at 1-year postoperatively (P = 0.011), and had significantly lower WOMAC Function Scores and WOMAC Stiffness Scores both at 1-year postoperatively and at the last follow-up. The anteversion angle of the cup in the DSA Group was significantly smaller than the PLA Group at postoperative day (POD) 3 and the last follow-up (P = 0.006 and P = 0.010, respectively). However, there was no difference in postoperative patient satisfaction, complication, LLD or HHS between the two groups. CONCLUSION: DSA demonstrated benefits in terms of reduced blood loss, improved pain scores, shorter incisions, and earlier ambulation. These advantages support the use of DSA for promoting early recovery and better mid-term functional outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Register (ChiCTR) with the register number ChiCTR2000041186 (registration date: 2020/12/21).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207