MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409665813 · doi:10.1177/22104917251336768

The direct anterior or direct lateral approach for simultaneous bilateral total hip arthroplasty: A functional recovery and in-hospital cost analysis

2025· article· en· W4409665813 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lee Benaroch, Patrick W Moody, Jacquelyn Marsh, Edward M. Vasarhelyi, Lyndsay Somerville, Brent A. Lanting

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedics Trauma and Rehabilitation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTotal hip arthroplastyArthroplastySurgeryPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Simultaneous bilateral total hip arthroplasty (sbTHA) has been demonstrated to be an excellent option for medically fit patients. To our knowledge, no previous studies have compared differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and costs of sbTHA performed via the direct anterior (DA) or direct lateral (DL) approaches. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of patients at our institution who underwent sbTHA between 2006 and 2020 with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Harris Hip Score, the Western Ontario MacMaster Arthritis Index, and Veteran RAND 12 Item Health Survey scores preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively. Limb length and combined offset discrepancy were assessed on the first standing postoperative radiograph. Perioperative costs were compiled from charts and adjusted for inflation before cost analysis. Results: A 2:1 match for age and sex selected 34 DA and 17 DL subjects. Diagnoses were similar among groups. The DA group had a significantly lower body mass index (26.99 vs. 32.61, p = 0.0009). There was no difference in the change in PROM or radiographic measures at 1-year postoperatively between groups. The DA group demonstrated significantly lower reported limp (8.3% vs. 46.2%, p = 0.013), procedure time (125.74 vs. 156.41 min, p < 0.001), operating room time (165.68 vs. 194.59 min, p = 0.005), length of stay (1.97 vs. 6.65 days, p < 0.001), and rehab discharge (11.8% vs. 47.1%, p = 0.012). Total perioperative costs were significantly less for the DA group (CAD 13,699.37 vs. CAD 18,491.82), with a mean difference of CAD 4792.45 ( p < 0.001). Conclusion: The DA approach showed reduced length of stay and surgical time, resulting in lower perioperative costs. PROM showed no difference; however, DA patients were less likely to have a limp 1-year postoperatively. Thus, the DA approach may lead to a better gait and lower costs for those undergoing sbTHA.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedics Trauma and RehabilitationSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207