Table 4.
Subgroup analysis of study design on complication rates with anterior versus posterior approach in primary total hip arthroplasty
| Comparative studies |
Registries |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcome | Studies | Rate ratio (95% CI)a | Studies | Rate ratio (95% CI)a | p-valueb |
| Infection | 6 | 0.66 (0.16–2.7) | 1 | 0.55 (0.37–0.80) | 0.8 |
| Thromboembolic event | 4 | 0.59 (0.14–2.4) | 0 | – | – |
| Heterotopic ossification | 3 | 0.58 (0.30–1.2) | 1 | 0.81 (0.24–2.7) | 0.6 |
| Dislocation | 8 | 0.55 (0.17–1.8) | 3 | 0.74 (0.39–1.4) | 0.7 |
| Reoperation | 12 | 1.03 (0.60–1.8) | 4 | 0.83 (0.72–0.95) | 0.5 |
| Wound | 5 | 0.93 (0.54–1.6) | 0 | – | – |
| Fracture | 9 | 1.7 (0.79–3.7) | 1 | 0.93 (0.66–1.3) | 0.2 |
| Patient-reported nerve injury | 1 | 5.0 (0.24–104) | 1 | 2.2 (1.2–4.3) | 0.6 |
a
Rate ratio >1 indicates higher complication incidence rate with anterior approach; RR <1 indicates lower complication incidence rate with anterior approach.
b
Comparison of rate ratio in comparative studies versus registries, derived from Knapp– Hartung random effects meta-regression model.