Skip to content

Short-term Results of SuperPATH Versus Direct Lateral Approach In Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Study.

Short-term Results of SuperPATH Versus Direct Lateral Approach In Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Study.

Status
Not yet recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07633925
Enrollment
100
Registered
2026-06-08
Start date
2026-07-01
Completion date
2029-07-01
Last updated
2026-06-08

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

Conditions

Compare Two Surgical Approaches Used in Total Hip Arthroplasty

Keywords

SuperPATH, total hip arthroplasty

Brief summary

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has shown great success in relieving joint pain and disability and has been a procedure of choice for the treatment of end-stage degenerative joint diseases and trauma. There are multiple surgical approaches for THA, including the traditional posterior approach, anterior approach, lateral approach, anterolateral approach and posterolateral approach; each has its advantages and complications. Modified direct lateral approach is considered as standard, most commonly used and familiar in Assiut university Arthroplasty centre. Yet it may cause abductor weakness, post operative pain, prolonged rehabilitation time and more blood loss. In the past two decades, the group of micro-posterior approaches was introduced. In 2004 Stephen Murphy developed the Supecapsular (SuperCap) approach, preparing the hip insitu to reduce soft tissue traumatization caused by the dislocation manoeuvre used in the conventional posterior approach. , In 2008 Brad Penenberg developed the percutaneously-assisted total hip (PATH) app, a tissue-sparing approach leading through the interval between gluteus medius and the conjoined tendon of the external rotators. In2011, James Chow described the supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPATH) approach, the most Important features of SuperPATH are the following: (a) muscle sparing between gluteus medius and piriformis without detaching external rotator tendons or disrupting the hip capsule, (b) femur preparation first without dislocation (c) percutaneous acetabular preparation. SuperPATH approach is designed to reduce soft tissue trauma and so blood loss, post operative pain, improve joint stability and allow earlier mobilization of patients. Despite the theoretical advantages of the SuperPATH approach, its adoption remains limited compared with conventional surgical approaches. Furthermore, there is ongoing debate regarding its clinical superiority in terms of functional outcomes, complication rates and implant position. Aim of our study is to evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes of total hip arthroplasty performed using SuperPATH compared to modified direct lateral approach.

Interventions

PROCEDURESurgical approaches: direct lateral approach for the hip and SuperPATH approach

Direct lateral approach is approach through the intra muscular septum of gluteus medial muscle SuperPATH approach is minimally invasive posterolateral approach for the hip

Sponsors

Assiut University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Masking description

Radomization will be preoperative for patients But the patient who do the operation and the surgeon will know the approach that will be used Outcome assessor will be masked

Intervention model description

We will divide population into two groups One group for direct lateral approach and the other for SuperPATH approach

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Primary total hip arthroplasty. 2. Age \> 18 years. 3. Body mass index \< 40 kg/m2. 4. Able to ambulate preoperative.

Exclusion criteria

1. Hip deformity (acetabular or femoral). 2. Ankylosed hips. 3. Severe osteoporosis. 4. Neuromuscular disorders.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Harris hip scoreImmediately post operative 3 months 6 months One year Two years

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Oxford hip scoreImmediately post operative 3 months 6 months One year Two years
Visual analogue scoreImmediately post operative 3 months 6 months One year Two years
Operative time in minutesDuration of the operation

Countries

Egypt

Contacts

CONTACTIslam Mohamed Abd el hameed, Assistant lecturer
islammohamed846@yahoo.com0201016329653
CONTACTMohamed Mostafa Alaa eldin and el aziz, Assistant professor
Mohamed.m.alaa@aun.edu.eg0201096967747

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jun 9, 2026