A comparison of short-term outcomes between SuperPath approach and modified transgluteal approach for bipolar hip arthroplasty

A comparison of short-term outcomes between SuperPath approach and modified transgluteal approach for bipolar hip arthroplasty - A comparison of short-term outcomes between SuperPath approach and modified transgluteal approach for bipolar hip arthroplasty

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

JPRN

Registry ID

JPRN-UMIN000032688

Enrollment

Registered

2018-05-23

Start date

2018-05-23

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2026-06-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Femoral neck fracture

Interventions

None listed

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Subjects who underwent bipolar hip arthroplasty for femoral neck or head fractures between December 2013 and November 2017 were included in this study. We used the Dall approach between December 2013 and July 2016 and switched to the SuperPath approach in August 2016.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Key exclusion criteria none

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
The outcome measures included the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, depth of implant subsidence at 1 month postoperatively, number of days to start walking, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Comparisons were made using the unpaired t-test for the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, depth of implant subsidence 1 month postoperatively, and number of days to start walking, and the chi-square test for intraoperative and postoperative complications. Differences were considered significant when p<0.05. The depth of implant subsidence was measured distance from top of greater trochanter to upper edge of stem on frontal radiographs at both immediately after the operation and 1month postoperatively. The distance was corrected on the frontal radiographs for diameter of outer head actually used.	—

Measure

Time frame

The outcome measures included the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, depth of implant subsidence at 1 month postoperatively, number of days to start walking, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Comparisons were made using the unpaired t-test for the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, depth of implant subsidence 1 month postoperatively, and number of days to start walking, and the chi-square test for intraoperative and postoperative complications. Differences were considered significant when p<0.05. The depth of implant subsidence was measured distance from top of greater trochanter to upper edge of stem on frontal radiographs at both immediately after the operation and 1month postoperatively. The distance was corrected on the frontal radiographs for diameter of outer head actually used.

—

Countries

Japan

Contacts

Public ContactKatsuhiko Fukushima

Fukushima Surgery orthopedic

jfk-fuku@sea.plala.or.jp+81-986-38-1633

Outcome results