DIRECT ANTERIOR VERSUS POSTEROLATERAL APPROACHES IN TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: A COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF EARLY AND LATE CLINICAL OUTCOMES

Uğur Özdemir , Muhammed Fatih Serttaş

  • Uğur Özdemir: BANDIRMA ONYEDİ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
  • Muhammed Fatih Serttaş: MARMARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ PENDİK EĞİTİM VE ARAŞTIRMA HASTANESİ
  • Year : 2026
  • Vol : 42
  • Issue : 3
  •  Page : 269-278
Objective: The direct anterior approach (DAA) and posterolateral approach (PLA) are commonly used in total hip arthroplasty (THA). This study aimed to compare
these approaches in terms of complication rates and functional outcomes.
Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 130 patients who underwent THA for primary hip osteoarthritis (DAA: 53; PLA: 77). All patients underwent
preoperative radiological and comorbidity assessments. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Harris Hip Score (HHS), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA)
Activity Score, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain preoperatively, at 3 months, and at final follow-up. Patients were followed at regular intervals for at least 1 year.
Results: There were no significant differences between groups in intraoperative blood loss, transfusion requirements, or hospital stay. Operative time was longer in
the DAA group (p=0.008). The overall complication rate was higher in the DAA group (p=0.049). Both groups showed significant improvement in clinical scores over
time. HHS was significantly higher in the DAA group at 3 months, but this difference diminished at final follow-up. The DAA group demonstrated higher UCLA scores
at final follow-up. Multivariable regression analysis identified preoperative UCLA score as an independent predictor of final UCLA score (B=0.371; p<0.001).
Conclusions: DAA was associated with longer operative time but showed no significant disadvantage in major perioperative outcomes compared to PLA. While DAA
provided an early functional benefit, long-term outcomes were comparable. Final outcomes appeared to be influenced more by patient-related factors than surgical
approach. Therefore, surgical approach selection should be individualized based on patient characteristics and surgeon experience.
Cite this Article As : Ozdemir U, Serttas MF. Direct Anterior Versus Posterolateral Approaches in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Comparative Evaluation of Early and Late Clinical Outcomes. Selcuk Med J 2026;42(3): 269-278

Download Citation: Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS) RIS File

Download Citation: BibTeX BibTeX File

Conflict of interest : The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article is published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Selcuk Medical Journal
2026, Vol. 42 (3)
ISSN: 1017-6616
E-ISSN: 2149-8059
Received : , Accepted : , Published Online :

References

  1. 1. Anger M, Valovska T, Beloeil H, et al. PROSPECT guideline for total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and procedure-specific postoperative pain management recommendations. Anaesthesia. 2021;76(8):1082-1097. doi:10.1111/anae.15498
  2. 2. Ang JJM, Onggo JR, Stokes CM, Ambikaipalan A. Comparing direct anterior approach versus posterior approach or lateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2023;33(7):2773-2792. doi:10.1007/s00590-023-03528-8
  3. 3. Jin Z, Wang L, Qin J, Hu H, Wei Q. Direct anterior approach versus posterolateral approach for total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Ann Med. 2023;55(1):1378-1392. doi:10.1080/07853890.2023.2193424
  4. 4. Singh G, Khurana A, Gupta S. Evaluation of Direct Anterior Approach for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review. Hip Pelvis. 2021;33(3):109-119. doi:10.5371/hp.2021.33.3.109
  5. 5. Leibovitch L, Machinski E, Fernandes A, et al. Direct anterior vs other surgical approaches in patients with lumbar stiffness undergoing total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024;145(1):48. Published 2024 Dec 16. doi:10.1007/s00402-024-05682-y
  6. 6. Tsai SHL, Lau NC, Chen WC, et al. Total hip arthroplasty has higher complication rates in patients with stiff spines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2022;17(1):353. Published 2022 Jul 16. doi:10.1186/s13018-022-03237-8
  7. 7. Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmerman JR. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60(2):217-220.
  8. 8. Pellicci PM, Bostrom M, Poss R. Posterior approach to total hip replacement using enhanced posterior soft tissue repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;(355):224-228. doi:10.1097/00003086-199810000-00023
  9. 9. Sun X, Zhao X, Zhou L, Su Z. Direct anterior approach versus posterolateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of results on early post-operative period. J Orthop Surg Res. 2021;16(1):69. Published 2021 Jan 19. doi:10.1186/s13018-021-02218-7
  10. 10. Wang Z, Bao HW, Hou JZ, et al. The Direct Anterior Approach versus the Posterolateral Approach on the Outcome of Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Clinical Study. Orthop Surg. 2022;14(10):2563-2570. doi:10.1111/os.13444
  11. 11. Fransen B, Hoozemans M, Vos S. Direct anterior approach versus posterolateral approach in total hip arthroplasty: one surgeon, two approaches. Acta Orthop Belg. 2016;82(2):240-248.
  12. 12. Wang Z, Hou JZ, Wu CH, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of direct anterior approach versus posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13(1):229. Published 2018 Sep 6. doi:10.1186/s13018-018-0929-4
  13. 13. Nassar JE, Ammar LA, Madi M, Mzeihem M, Hemdanieh M, Nassereddine M. Direct Anterior Approach and Posterior Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Randomized Controlled Trials. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2025;17:137665. Published 2025 May 23. doi:10.52965/001c.137665
  14. 14. Yang XT, Huang HF, Sun L, Yang Z, Deng CY, Tian XB. Direct Anterior Approach Versus Posterolateral Approach in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies. Orthop Surg. 2020;12(4):1065-1073. doi:10.1111/os.12669
  15. 15. Awad ME, Farley BJ, Mostafa G, Saleh KJ. Direct anterior approach has short-term functional benefit and higher resource requirements compared with the posterior approach in primary total hip arthroplasty : a meta-analysis of functional outcomes and cost. Bone Joint J. 2021;103-b(6):1078-1087. doi:10.1302/ 0301-620x.103b6.Bjj-2020-1271.R1
  16. 16. Yan L, Ge L, Dong S, et al. Evaluation of Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Surgical Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(1):e2253942. doi:10.1001/ jamanetworkopen.2022.53942
  17. 17. Peng L, Zeng Y, Wu Y, Zeng J, Liu Y, Shen B. Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes of primary total hip arthroplasty between direct anterior approach and posterior approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2020;21(1):338. doi:10.1186/s12891-020-03318-x
  18. 18. Zhao HY, Kang PD, Xia YY, Shi XJ, Nie Y, Pei FX. Comparison of early functional recovery after total hip arthroplasty using a direct anterior or posterolateral approach: a randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplast. 2017;32:3421–8.
  19. 19. Yang Z, Feng S, Guo KJ, Zha GC. Patient-reported results of simultaneous direct anterior approach and posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasties performed in the same patients. J Orthop Traumatol. 2021;22(1):46. Published 2021 Nov 13. doi:10.1186/s10195-021-00611-w
  20. 20. Gazendam A, Bozzo A, Ekhtiari S, et al. Short- term outcomes vary by surgical approach in total hip arthroplasty: a network meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022;142(10):2893-2902. doi:10.1007/s00402-021-04131-4
  21. 21. Moerenhout K, Derome P, Laflamme GY, Leduc S, Gaspard HS, Benoit B. Direct anterior versus posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: a multicentre, prospective, randomized clinical trial. Can J Surg. 2020;63(5):E412-E417. doi:10.1503/cjs.012019
  22. 22. Barrett WP, Turner SE, Leopold JP. Prospective randomized study of direct anterior vs postero-lateral approach for total hip. J Arthroplasty 2013;28:1634-8.
  23. 23. Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y, et al. The incidence of and risk factors for 30 day surgical site infections following primary and revision total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(9 Suppl):47–50.
  24. 24. George J, Mahmood B, Sultan AA, et al. How fast should a total knee arthroplasty be performed? An analysis of 140,199 surgeries. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(8):2616–22.
  25. 25. Spaans AJ, van den Hout JA, Bolder SB. High complication rate in the early experience of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty by the direct anterior approach. Acta Orthop 2012;83:342-6.
  26. 26. Poehling-Monaghan KL, Kamath AF, Taunton MJ, et al. Direct anterior versus miniposterior THA with the same advanced perioperative protocols: surprising early clinical results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015;473:623-31.
  27. 27. Hodges A, Harmer AR, Dennis S, et al. Prevalence and determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour before and up to 12 months after total knee replacement: a longitudinal cohort study. Clin Rehabil. 2018;32(9):1271-1283. doi:10.1177/0269215518769986
  28. 28. Harding P, Holland AE, Delany C, et al. Do activity levels increase after total hip and knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472(5): 1502–1511.
  29. 29. Naal F, Impellizzeri F and Leunig M. Which is the best activity rating scale for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467(4): 958–965.
  30. 30. Gilbey HJ, Ackland TR, Wang AW, Morton AR, Trouchet T, Tapper J. Exercise improves early functional recovery after total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;408:193-200.
  31. 31. Wang AW, Gilbey HJ, Ackland TR. Perioperative exercise programs improve early return of ambulatory function after total hip arthroplasty: a randomized, controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;81:801–806.
Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 5