Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The main objective of our study was to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of direct anterior approach (DAA) with posterolateral approaches (PLA). METHODS: We searched Cochrane library, Web of Science, and PubMed for literatures comparing DAA with PLA. On the basis of inclusion and exclusion criteria, relevant literatures were selected. Two members independently screened qualified literatures, evaluated the literature quality, and extracted data information. RESULTS: Eighteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs totaling 34,873 patients (DAA = 9636, PLA = 25237) were contained in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The results showed that DAA were reduced in terms of length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference (WMD) = -0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.78 to -0.09, P = 0.01), LLD (WMD = -2.00, 95% CI -2.75 to -1.25, P < 0.00001), PE/DVT (WMD = 0.36, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.85, P = 0.02), dislocation (WMD = 0.42, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.59, P < 0.00001) and visual analog scale (VAS) (WMD = -0.57, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.23, P = 0.0009) compared with PLA; however, DAA compared with the PLA was increasing in terms of operative time (WMD = 14.81, 95% CI 7.18 to 22.44, P = 0.0001), intraoperative blood loss (WMD = 105.13, 95% CI 25.35 to 184.90, P = 0.01), fracture (WMD = 1.46, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.11, P = 0.05), and Harris hip score (HHS) (WMD = 1.19, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.61, P < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: DAA was preferable effectiveness to PLA in early pain relief and functional recovery; however, PLA has a shorter operation time, intraoperative less blood loss and fracture. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration ID, CRD42020151208.