ObjectiveTo compare the clinical and radiographic results between primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) via mini-subvastus or conventional approach through a prospective randomized controlled study.MethodsNinety-four patients (104 knees) undergoing primary TKA between January 2011 and April 2012 were evaluated and randomly divided into 2 groups. Forty-six patients (52 knees) underwent TKA via conventional approach (conventional approach group), and 48 patients (52 knees) underwent TKA via mini-subvastus approach (mini-subvastus approach group). In these patients, 45 cases (51 knees) in conventional approach group and 45 cases (49 knees) in mini-subvastus approach group were followed up and recruited in the final analysis. There was no significant difference in age, gender, body mass index, sides, osteoarthritis grading, American Knee Society Score (KSS), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, visual analogue scale (VAS), range of motion (ROM) of knee between 2 groups (P>0.05). The clinical indexes were recorded and analyzed, including the operation time, length of incision, total blood loss, blood transfusion after operation, hospital stay time, the time of performing straight leg raise, incision condition, VAS score, ROM of knee, HSS score, and KSS score, hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), femoral anatomic axis and the femoral prosthesis joint angle (femoral angle), tibia anatomic axis and tibial prosthesis joint angle (tibial angle), femoral prosthesis flexion angle (FPFA), and posterior slope angle (PSA) of the tibial plateau.ResultsAll patients were followed up. The average follow-up time was 66.4 months (range, 60.0-72.5 months) in conventional approach group and 65.6 months (range, 60.0-71.2 months) in mini-subvastus approach group. Compared with the conventional approach group, the incision of mini-subvastus approach group shortened, the operation time prolonged, and the time when patients started straight leg raise exercises was earlier; showing significant differences between 2 groups (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in hospital stay time, total blood loss, and numbers of blood transfusion between 2 groups (P>0.05). The complication rate was 8.2% (4/49) in mini-subvastus approach group and 0 in conventional approach group, showing no significant difference between 2 groups (P=0.054). At 1 and 3 days, the VAS and the ROM of knee in mini-subvastus approach group were significantly better than those in conventional approach group (P<0.05); but there was no significant difference in above indexes between 2 groups at 14 day (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in HSS and KSS scores between 2 groups at the 1, 3, 6, 12 months and 3, 5 years (P>0.05). X-ray film showed no aseptic loosening in all cases. There was no significant difference in the measured values and incidence of abnormal patient of HKA, femoral angle, tibial angle, FPFA, and PSA at last follow-up between 2 groups (P>0.05).ConclusionTKA via mini-subvastus approach is helpful to the early function recovery of knee, but the long-term effectiveness is consistent with TKA via conventional approach. As the limited exposure, TKA via mini-subvastus spproach may has high risk of operative complications.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness between modified ilioinguinal approach combined with Kocher-Langenbeck (K-L) approach and Stoppa approach combined with K-L approach for the treatment of complicated acetabular fractures.MethodsBetween May 2011 and May 2016, Sixty-two patients with complicated acetabular fractures were treated with operation via combined anterior and posterior approaches. Thirty-four cases (group A) were treated with modified ilioinguinal approach combined with K-L approach, and 28 cases (group B) were treated with Stoppa approach combined with K-L approach. There was no significant difference in gender, age, injury causes, the type of fracture, time from injury to operation, and associated injury between 2 groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospitalization time were recorded. X-ray film was performed to evaluate the fracture reduction according to the Matta reduction criteria and observe the fracture healing, osteoarthritis, and heterotopic ossification. Clinical results were evaluated according to the grading system of modified d’Aubigne and Postel.ResultsThere was no significant difference in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospitalization time between 2 groups (P>0.05). Postoperative incision fat liquefaction occurred in 2 cases in group A and group B respectively, and deep vein thrombosis of lower extremity occurred in 1 case in group A. No iatrogenic injury was found in 2 groups. Fifty-six patients were followed up after operation. Thirty patients in group A were followed up 12-48 months (mean, 31.8 months). Twenty-six patients in group B were followed up 12-46 months (mean, 30.2 months). At 12 months after operation, according to the grading system of modified d’Aubigne and Postel, the hip function was rated as excellent in 9 cases, good in 16 cases, fair in 3 cases, and poor in 2 cases, with the excellent and good rate of 83.3% in group A; the hip function was rated as excellent in 7 cases, good in 14 cases, fair in 2 cases, and poor in 3 cases, with the excellent and good rate of 80.8% in group B. There was no significant difference in the hip function between 2 groups (Z=0.353, P=0.724). The X-ray films showed that there were 23 cases of anatomical reduction, 6 cases of satisfactory reduction, and 1 case of unsatisfactory reduction in group A, and 20 cases, 5 cases, and 1 case in group B, respectively. There was no significant difference in the results of fracture reduction between 2 groups (Z=0.011, P=0.991). Fracture healing was observed in both groups. There was no significant difference in fracture healing time between 2 groups (t=0.775, P=0.106). During follow-up, 5 cases of osteoarthritis changes, 2 cases of heterotopic ossification, and 2 cases of avascular necrosis of femoral head occurred in group A, and 4 cases, 2 cases, and 1 case in group B, respectively. The difference between 2 groups was not significant (P>0.05).ConclusionAccording to the location and type of fracture, making a choice between the modified anterior approach and Stoppa approach, and then combined with K-L approach for treatment of complicated acetabular fracture, can obtain satisfactory effectiveness.