You are viewing the site in preview mode

Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary of previous studies comparing the clinical outcomes in THA

From: Optimizing implant positioning in total hip arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach: The role and technique of conventional traction table and fluoroscopy

Articles

Traction table

Number of hips (n)

Age (years)

BMI (kg/m2)

Implant survival rate (%)

Surgical complication rate (%)

Dislocation rate (%)

Blood loss

(mL)

Surgical time (min)

Follow-up

(months)

This study

Conventional traction table

101

76.2

23.0

100

1.0

0

133

73

9.1

Matta [9]

Carbon fiber traction table

494

64

NA

NA

3.4

0.6

350

75

NA

Woolson [10]

Carbon fiber traction table

247

67.7

28.4

97.2

15.8

0

858

164

8

Hamilton [11]

Carbon fiber traction table

100

61.1

29

98

3.0

2.0

NA

NA

NA

Cheng [12]

Carbon fiber traction table

35

61

28

97.1

11.4

2.9

NA

125

3

Lin [13]

Carbon fiber traction table

108

61.2

28.1

NA

NA

NA

NA

81

NA

Wernly [14]

Carbon fiber traction table

75

70

26

96.0

6.7

0

746

142

43

Moslemi [15]

Carbon fiber traction table

137

65

25.1

NA

3.7

1.5

NA

NA

NA

Domb [16]

Robot-assisted

66

59.0

29.2

95.5

6.0

1.5

NA

NA

 > 60

Illgen [17]

Robot-assisted

100

62.4

29.2

NA

0

0

358

143

27.6

Stewart [18]

Robot-assisted

100

62.2

29.6

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Foissey [19]

Robot-assisted

50

66.5

26.9

NA

4

0

NA

112

12

  1. The number of the author’s name reflects the reference number. BMI Body Mass Index, NA Not Applicable