Direct Anterior Approach THA Fact vs. Fiction John M. Keggi, MD - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
direct anterior approach tha fact vs fiction
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Direct Anterior Approach THA Fact vs. Fiction John M. Keggi, MD - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 21, 2022 267 likes •986 views

Direct Anterior Approach THA Fact vs. Fiction John M. Keggi, MD Connecticut Joint Replacement Institute Disclosures Smith & Nephew - Consultant OmniLife Science - Consultant & Royalties Medtronic - Consultant Concept

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Direct Anterior Approach THA Fact vs. Fiction

John M. Keggi, MD

Connecticut Joint Replacement Institute

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Disclosures

  • Smith & Nephew - Consultant
  • OmniLife Science - Consultant &

Royalties

  • Medtronic - Consultant
  • Concept Design and Development
  • Signature Orthopaedics -

Consultant

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Disclosures

  • Safe
  • Easy
  • I’ve always done it that way
slide-4
SLIDE 4

Myths

  • New
  • Unsafe
  • Building a ship in a bottle
  • Difficult
  • Rarely performed
  • Not possible without a special table
  • Not possible without special tools
  • Not extensile
  • Limited applications beyond THA
  • No functional difference
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Myths

  • New
  • Unsafe
  • Building a ship in a bottle
  • Difficult
  • Rarely performed
  • Not possible without a special table
  • Not possible without special tools
  • Not extensile
  • Limited applications beyond THA
  • No functional difference
slide-6
SLIDE 6
slide-7
SLIDE 7

“The Anterior Approach is new!”

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Hueter 1883

  • “...the leg keeps its tight connection to the

pelvis which facilitates rehabilitation...”

  • “...bleeding is so little, that no single

ligature has to be done...”

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Smith-Petersen, 1917

slide-10
SLIDE 10
slide-11
SLIDE 11
slide-12
SLIDE 12
  • “Hueter’s straight anterior

incision... does not require any muscle cutting or detachment, and no postoperative immobilization is needed.”

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Direct Anterior THA

Kristaps J. Keggi 1971

Scientific exhibit at AAOS, 1977, Las Vegas

Clinical Orthopaedics October 1980

Stan Schofield (Melbourne) & George Braddock (London)

slide-14
SLIDE 14

“Mini-Posterior” Approaches

  • PATH, SuperPATH, SuperCap
  • “Direct Posterior” Approach - DPA

Core features of the DAA For the last 40 years

  • Spare IT Band
  • Release Conjoined tendon only
  • Gluteal - sparing
slide-15
SLIDE 15

Safety

  • Good visibility at all times
  • Sciatic nerve
  • Femoral bundle
  • Thrombo-embolism
  • Anesthesia access
  • X-ray access
slide-16
SLIDE 16

Safety

  • Good visibility at all times
  • Sciatic nerve
  • Femoral bundle
  • Thrombo-embolism
  • Anesthesia access
  • X-ray access

“The Anterior Approach isn’t safe”

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Two-Incision Confusion

slide-18
SLIDE 18

banff

Presentation at Yale Orthopaedic Alumni Meeting in Banff, Canada 1988 Two incision anterior approach

slide-19
SLIDE 19

JBJS 2003 Ant THR

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Complications

  • Dislocation: 0.1%
  • Fracture requiring fixation: 1%
  • DVT + PE: 0.8%
  • 2132 patients

– Body wt: 80 to 450 pounds

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Soft Tissue & Vascularity

slide-22
SLIDE 22
  • Doppler study, 10 pts, DAA THA, Traction table
  • Non-signif reduction in FA and FV flow
  • Acetabular & femoral prep and final reduction
slide-23
SLIDE 23

Xray capability

– Fluoro table – Standard OR bed – XR Cassette options

slide-24
SLIDE 24
slide-25
SLIDE 25

“It’s like building a ship in a bottle.” “It’s difficult.”

slide-26
SLIDE 26
slide-27
SLIDE 27
slide-28
SLIDE 28
slide-29
SLIDE 29
slide-30
SLIDE 30
slide-31
SLIDE 31
slide-32
SLIDE 32

AAKHS Data -DA

  • 2008 -- 8%
  • 2009 -- 12%
  • 2010 -- 16%
  • ICJR-- 25% of surgeons with >50 THA/yr

– 2012

  • 2016 — 34%
slide-33
SLIDE 33

AAKHS Data -DA

  • 2008 -- 8%
  • 2009 -- 12%
  • 2010 -- 16%
  • ICJR-- 25% of surgeons with >50 THA/yr

– 2012

  • 2016 — 34%
slide-34
SLIDE 34

AAKHS Data -DA

  • 2008 -- 8%
  • 2009 -- 12%
  • 2010 -- 16%
  • ICJR-- 25% of surgeons with >50 THA/yr

– 2012

  • 2016 — 34%

“The Anterior Approach is rarely used”

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Regarding Tables….

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Regarding Tables….

“The Anterior Approach requires a special table.”

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Regarding Tables…

Cadaver labs

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Instruments

slide-39
SLIDE 39
slide-40
SLIDE 40

Extensile

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Extensile

“The Anterior Approach can’t be extended.”

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Safety

  • There is no

circumstance that you cannot manage safely from the anterior approach

slide-43
SLIDE 43
  • Cup positioning
  • “Safe Zone”
  • Soft tissue concerns
  • Functional recovery

Current Literature

“There is no functional benefit...”

slide-44
SLIDE 44

AJO Oct 2014

Cup Angle - Peak Contact Stress

slide-45
SLIDE 45

Cup Positioning

  • 185 pts, Consecutive series (2003-2005)
  • Standard OR bed; Xray on POD 1,2 or 3
  • 99% of cups properly positioned in the “Safe

Zone”

  • 91% for posterior approach

JOA 24(5), 2009

slide-46
SLIDE 46
  • Single surgeon, 2 series
  • 100 PA vs 1st 100 DA cases
  • PA: Greater cup variance
  • PA: More large heads and lateralized liners
slide-47
SLIDE 47

Instability

  • DA: 2 cases of instability
  • One revision for instability
  • PA: 4 cases of instability
  • 4 revisions for instability
slide-48
SLIDE 48
  • Case series: 2 PA surgeons, 1 DA surgeon
  • CPK & TNF-alpha

JBJS 2011; 93:1392

Soft Tissue

slide-49
SLIDE 49
  • Less soft tissue damage on MRI

at one year post-op

  • 50 pts (25 each group)
  • TFL equal changes
  • Less detachment, tendinitis,

tears, fatty atrophy of gluteals

Bone & Joint (JBJS-B) 2011

slide-50
SLIDE 50
  • MIS DA, 2-incision DA, MIS AL, MIS PA,

Lat Trans-gluteal

  • Cadaver study, muscle staining and

dissection

  • Gluteal damage least with DAA

Acta Orth 2010; 81(6):696

slide-51
SLIDE 51
  • Significantly quicker in single leg stance, loss of

limp, walking speed and weaning from assistive device

JOA 24(5), 2009

Functional Recovery

slide-52
SLIDE 52
  • LOS 22d vs 30d (p=0.03)
  • Presence of Trendelenburg gait at 3 wks:
  • 29% vs 67% (p<0.001)
  • Negative Trendelenburg sign:
  • 17d vs 25d (p=0.0002)
  • Single leg stance >5s:
  • 17d vs 23 d (p=0.0004)
  • Gait w/cane >200m:
  • 12d vs 15.5d (p=0.009)

Nakata, JOA 24(5), 2009

slide-53
SLIDE 53
  • Single surgeon, 128 pts, “Fast track”
  • 2005-2007
  • DAA vs Direct Lateral Approach
  • Physical and mental outcomes SF-36 and

WOMAC better at 1 year; equal at 2 years

slide-54
SLIDE 54
  • 50 pts PA; 1st 50 DA pts; Next 50 DA pts
  • Single surgeon series
  • Identical pre-emptive pain protocols
slide-55
SLIDE 55
slide-56
SLIDE 56
slide-57
SLIDE 57
  • Single surgeon; 87 randomized pts
  • Surgical time: 84m vs 60m PA
  • Blood loss: 391 cc vs 191 cc PA
  • LOS: 2.3d vs 3.0d PA
slide-58
SLIDE 58

DA PA

slide-59
SLIDE 59
slide-60
SLIDE 60
slide-61
SLIDE 61
  • Single surgeon, randomized trial, 51 pts
  • (experience of 2000 PA, 500 DAA)
  • Equal stairs, shoes/socks, up/go at 6 wks
  • Walking aide: 33d vs 43d (p=0.03)
  • LOS: 1.4d vs 2.0d (p= 0.01)
  • Pain relief: HHS-PS 27.8 vs 20.7 (p=0.04)
slide-62
SLIDE 62

Pain Control

J Ortho Res 2015

slide-63
SLIDE 63
slide-64
SLIDE 64

Impingement

  • Arthroscopy
  • Mini Open Direct Anterior
slide-65
SLIDE 65

Impingement

  • Arthroscopy
  • Mini Open Direct Anterior

“The Anterior Approach is limited to total hips.”

slide-66
SLIDE 66

Impingement

  • Surgical Dislocation

– Anterolateral with trochanteric osteotomy – vs DAA

slide-67
SLIDE 67

Mini-Open FAI

slide-68
SLIDE 68

Hip Resurfacing

March 2010

slide-69
SLIDE 69

Direct Anterior Approach - Fact

  • Patient and surgeon satisfaction
  • Simplicity of set up
  • Extensile capability
  • Muscle recovery
  • Marketability
  • Cup position
  • Versatility
  • Stability
  • Safety
slide-70
SLIDE 70

Direct Anterior Approach - Fact

  • Patient and surgeon satisfaction
  • Simplicity of set up
  • Extensile capability
  • Muscle recovery
  • Marketability
  • Cup position
  • Versatility
  • Stability
  • Safety

Thank You !