1. |
Wilson JM, Hadley ML, Larson D, et al. Outcomes following direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: A contemporary multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2025, 107(4): 356-363.
|
2. |
Hagio K, Aikawa K. Minimally invasive surgery supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPath) arthroplasty. Acta Biomed, 2023, 94(3): e2023069. doi: 10.23750/abm.v94i3.13922.
|
3. |
Chow J, Penenberg B, Murphy S. Modified micro-superior percutaneously-assisted total hip: early experiences & case reports. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med, 2011, 4(3): 146-150.
|
4. |
Penenberg BL, Bolling WS, Riley M. Percutaneously assisted total hip arthroplasty (PATH): a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2008, 90 Suppl 4: 209-220.
|
5. |
Capuano N, Grillo G, Carbone F, et al. Total hip arthroplasty performed with a tissue-preserving technique using superior capsulotomy. Int Orthop, 2018, 42(2): 281-287.
|
6. |
Korytkin AA, El Moudni YM, Novikova YS, et al. A prospective randomised comparison of earlier function after total hip arthroplasty with a mini posterior approach or supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip approach: a gait analysis study. Hip Int, 2023, 33(2): 169-177.
|
7. |
Ramadanov N. An updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on total hip arthroplasty through SuperPATH versus conventional approaches. Orthop Surg, 2022, 14(5): 807-823.
|
8. |
Hu Y, Wang MC, Wang T, et al. Less blood loss in supercapsular percutaneously assisted versus posterolateral total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res, 2021, 16(1): 217. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02363-z.
|
9. |
Zhao Y, Sun W, Wang C, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes of supercapsular percutaneously-assisted approach total hip arthroplasty versus conventional posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2024, 25(1): 25. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-07126-x.
|
10. |
Khoja YT, Habis AA, Wood GCA. The supercapsular percutaneously assisted total hip approach does not provide any clinical advantage over the conventional posterior approach for THA in a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2023, 481(6): 1116-1125.
|
11. |
Tan BKL, Khan RJK, Haebich SJ, et al. Piriformis-sparing minimally invasive versus the standard posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: A 10-year follow-up of a randomized control trial. J Arthroplasty, 2019, 34(2): 319-326.
|
12. |
甘锋平, 杨克勤, 张其标, 等. SuperPATH入路松解梨状肌全髋关节置换术的早期疗效. 中华骨与关节外科杂志, 2023, 16(10): 907-913.
|
13. |
Amanatullah DF, Shah HN, Barrett AA, et al. A small amount of retraction force results in inadvertent piriformis muscle damage during a piriformis-sparing approach to the hip. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2020, 102(19): 1687-1693.
|
14. |
Choudhury AK, Regmi A, Niraula BB, et al. An additional intra-operative peri-articular tranexamic acid decreases the drain output but does not benefit in total blood loss conservation during bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: A retrospective observation. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2024 Oct 16;57: 102770. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2024.102770 PMID: 39525859; PMCID: PMC11541940..
|
15. |
Rykov K, Meys TWGM, Knobben BAS, et al. MRI assessment of muscle damage after the posterolateral versus direct anterior approach for THA (polada trial). A randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty, 2021, 36(9): 3248-3258.
|
16. |
Meng W, Huang Z, Wang H, et al. Supercapsular percutaneously-assisted total hip (SuperPath) versus posterolateral total hip arthroplasty in bilateral osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a pilot clinical trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2019, 21(1): 2. doi: 10.1186/s12891-019-3023-0.
|
17. |
Bergin PF, Doppelt JD, Kephart CJ, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive direct anterior versus posterior total hip arthroplasty based on inflammation and muscle damage markers. J Bone Joint Surg (Am), 2011, 93(15): 1392-1398.
|
18. |
Rykov K, Reininga IHF, Sietsma MS, et al. Posterolateral vs direct anterior approach in total hip arthroplasty (POLADA trial): A randomized controlled trial to assess differences in serum markers. J Arthroplasty, 2017, 32(12): 3652-3658.
|
19. |
Sarantis MG, Mandrekas PI, Stasi S, et al. Serum biomarkers for the assessment of muscle damage in various surgical approaches in primary total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review of comparative studies. Int Orthop, 2022, 46(8): 1681-1692.
|
20. |
Iorio R, Viglietta E, Mazza D, et al. Do serum markers correlate with invasiveness of the procedure in THA? A prospective randomized study comparing direct anterior and lateral approaches. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2021, 107(8): 102937. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102937.
|
21. |
Lalevée M, Matsoukis J, Beldame J, et al. MRI assessment of piriformis-sparing posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2021, 107(8): 103085. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2021.103085.
|
22. |
Fritz J, Lurie B, Miller TT, et al. MR imaging of hip arthroplasty implants. Radiographics, 2014, 34(4): E106-E132.
|
23. |
Kawano T, Nankaku M, Murao M, et al. Association of physical activity with fatty infiltration of muscles after total hip arthroplasty. Skeletal Radiol, 2024, 53(5): 967-974.
|
24. |
Damm P, Brackertz S, Streitparth F, et al. ESB Clinical Biomechanics Award 2018: Muscle atrophy-related increased joint loading after total hip arthroplasty and their postoperative change from 3 to 50 months. Clin Biomech (Bristol), 2019, 65: 105-109.
|