Orthonotes Logo
Orthonotes
by the.bonestories

Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) — Approaches & Complications

3 Views

Category: Arthroplasty

Share Wiki QR Card Download Slides (.pptx)
Surgical approaches: posterior, anterolateral, direct anterior, transtrochanteric. Posterior: excellent exposure, preserves abductors, higher dislocation risk. Anterolateral: stable, lower dislocation, abductor weakness risk. Direct anterior: internervous, muscle-sparing, early rehab, risk of LFCN injury, intra-op fracture. Transtrochanteric: trochanteric osteotomy, good exposure, risk of nonunion. Complications: dislocation, infection, aseptic loosening, periprosthetic fractures, nerve injury, heterotopic ossification.
Published Feb 28, 2026 • Author: The Bone Stories ✅
🧠 Test Yourself with OrthoMind AI

10 AI-generated high-yield questions by our AI engine



Overview & Indications

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful operations in all of surgery and the most commonly performed elective orthopaedic procedure worldwide. It reliably relieves pain and restores function in end-stage hip disease. Understanding approaches, implant selection, bearing surfaces, and complications is fundamental knowledge for all orthopaedic surgeons.

  • Approximately 2.5 million THAs performed globally each year; numbers increasing as population ages and younger patients are offered surgery
  • Primary indications: osteoarthritis (80–85%), rheumatoid arthritis, avascular necrosis, fracture (femoral neck in elderly), dysplasia, post-traumatic arthritis, inflammatory arthropathy, tumour
  • Contraindications: active infection (absolute), neurological impairment precluding rehabilitation, severe medical comorbidity, non-ambulatory patient with no pain (relative)
  • Timing: failure of conservative management (analgesia, activity modification, physiotherapy, walking aids, weight loss) combined with significant impact on quality of life and radiological evidence of joint destruction
  • Oxford Hip Score (OHS): validated patient-reported outcome measure for THA; 12 questions; 0–48 scale (48 = best function); used pre- and post-operatively to assess outcomes and justify surgical intervention
Surgical Approaches
Approach Internervous Plane Structures at Risk Dislocation Direction
Posterior (Southern/Moore) Gluteus maximus split; short external rotators divided Sciatic nerve; superior gluteal nerve if too superior Posterior dislocation — avoid flexion + IR + adduction
Anterolateral (Hardinge/Watson-Jones) Between gluteus medius/minimus and tensor fascia lata (TFL); superior gluteal nerve Superior gluteal nerve (if dissection extends >5 cm above GT); femoral nerve (anterior) Anterior dislocation — avoid extension + ER
Direct Anterior (DAA / Smith-Petersen) Between sartorius (femoral N) and TFL (superior gluteal N) — truly internervous Lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN); femoral nerve; lateral circumflex femoral vessels Anterior dislocation — avoid extension + ER
Direct Lateral (Hardinge) Splits gluteus medius and vastus lateralis through greater trochanter Superior gluteal nerve; abductor mechanism detachment Anterior or posterior depending on component position
  • Posterior approach: most widely used worldwide; highest dislocation risk (3–4% without posterior capsule repair; reduced to ~1% with meticulous posterior capsule and short rotator repair); sciatic nerve injury most feared complication
  • Direct anterior approach (DAA): growing in popularity; truly internervous; allows intraoperative fluoroscopy for component positioning; faster rehabilitation in some series; higher learning curve; LFCN injury rate 5–15%; fracture risk in femoral preparation
  • Hardinge (direct lateral): associated with abductor lurch (Trendelenburg) from gluteus medius damage if trochanteric reattachment fails — up to 15–20% incidence of persistent Trendelenburg in some series
  • Safe zone for superior gluteal nerve: stay within 5 cm proximal to the tip of the greater trochanter in anterolateral and direct lateral approaches
Implant Fixation
Fixation Type Mechanism Indication
Cemented (PMMA) Bone cement fills interface; immediate mechanical fixation; relies on cement mantle integrity Elderly (>75), poor bone quality, osteoporosis, proximal femoral deformity; Exeter/CPT stems
Cementless (press-fit) Initial press-fit stability; biological osseointegration into porous/HA-coated surface Younger patients (<65), good bone stock; requires 6–8 weeks for osseointegration
Hybrid Cemented stem + cementless cup (most common); or reverse hybrid (cementless stem + cemented cup) Middle-aged patients; balances advantages of both; most common configuration in UK
  • Cement implantation syndrome (BCIS — bone cement implantation syndrome): hypotension, hypoxia, cardiac arrhythmia, and cardiac arrest at time of cement pressurisation or stem insertion; caused by fat, marrow, and cement monomer embolisation; risk highest in elderly with cardiorespiratory disease; venting the femoral canal reduces risk; anaesthetic team must be alerted before cement insertion
  • NJR (National Joint Registry, UK): reports 10-year survivorship for primary THA at approximately 95%; cemented and cementless fixation have equivalent long-term outcomes in appropriate patient selection
Bearing Surfaces
Bearing Wear Properties Complications
Metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) Conventional; polyethylene wear generates particles → osteolysis → aseptic loosening Osteolysis; particle disease; wear rates reduced with cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE)
Ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP) Lower wear than MoP; ceramic femoral head reduces polyethylene wear rate Ceramic fracture (rare, <0.01%); squeaking
Ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) Lowest wear rates; hardest bearing; ideal for young active patients Squeaking (2–10%); stripe wear; catastrophic fracture (rare); cannot use in MRI-dependent patients
Metal-on-metal (MoM) Low volumetric wear; but generates metallic ions (cobalt, chromium) ALVAL (aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesion); pseudotumour; elevated serum Co/Cr; MHRA recall; largely abandoned
  • Cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE): radiation cross-linking dramatically reduces polyethylene wear rate (approximately 80% reduction vs conventional PE); now standard bearing in most centres; highly oxidised XLPE (Vitamin E-stabilised) further improves oxidation resistance
  • Metal-on-metal: all large-head MoM THAs and resurfacings require annual surveillance — serum cobalt and chromium ion levels; MARS MRI for pseudotumour; MHRA guidance mandates follow-up protocol
Complications
Complication Incidence Key Points
Dislocation 1–3% primary; 5–10% revision Most common early complication; posterior approach highest risk; direction depends on approach; closed reduction under sedation first-line; revision for recurrent instability
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) 1–2% Most devastating complication; Staphylococcus most common organism; diagnosis by MSIS criteria; treat with DAIR (early), single-stage, or two-stage revision; suppressive antibiotics for non-operative cases
Aseptic loosening Leading cause of revision at 10–20 years Wear particle-induced osteolysis; pain on weight-bearing; lucent lines on X-ray; revision required when symptomatic
Periprosthetic fracture (PPF) 0.1–1% primary; higher cementless Vancouver classification (A, B, C); B2/B3 require revision; B1 treated with ORIF around well-fixed stem
Nerve injury Sciatic 0.5–2%; femoral <0.5% Sciatic most common (posterior approach); peroneal division most vulnerable; limb lengthening >2.5 cm increases risk; observe for recovery; neurophysiology at 3 months
VTE (DVT/PE) DVT 1–2% symptomatic; PE 0.1–0.2% Chemical and mechanical prophylaxis mandatory; NICE guidelines: LMWH or rivaroxaban for 28 days post-THA
Leg length discrepancy (LLD) 10–15% perceive LLD >5 mm >2.5 cm LLD: sciatic nerve at risk; inform patients pre-operatively; templating essential
Consultant-Level Considerations
  • Vancouver classification for periprosthetic femoral fractures: Type A (trochanteric); Type B1 (around/below stem — stem well fixed); Type B2 (stem loose); Type B3 (stem loose + poor bone stock); Type C (below stem); B2/B3 = revision surgery; B1 = ORIF with plates ± cables
  • Instability after THA: the most common cause of revision in modern practice in the UK (NJR data); assess component positioning (cup anteversion 15–20°, abduction 40–45° — combined anteversion concept); trochanteric advancement for abductor deficiency; constrained liner for recurrent instability when component position is satisfactory
  • Corrosion at modular junction (trunnion corrosion): cobalt-chrome taper corrosion in modular THA generates local metal debris even without MoM bearing surface; adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) mimicking infection; elevated serum cobalt; MARS MRI for assessment; may require modular head exchange
  • THA in dysplasia: complex anatomy — high hip centre, deficient acetabular bone stock, femoral deformity, short femur; may require acetabular augmentation (structural allograft, cage, augment), true acetabular cup placement even at high position, and modular or custom femoral stems; high-volume surgeon and centre
  • Obesity and THA: BMI >40 associated with higher complication rates (infection, dislocation, VTE, wound problems); frank discussion with patient; optimise BMI pre-operatively; some centres set BMI threshold (<40) before listing
Exam Pearls
  • Posterior approach: highest dislocation risk; sciatic nerve at risk; posterior capsule + short rotator repair reduces dislocation to ~1%
  • Hardinge (direct lateral): Trendelenburg from abductor damage; superior gluteal nerve at risk if >5 cm above GT
  • DAA: truly internervous (sartorius vs TFL); LFCN injury 5–15%; fluoroscopy-guided component positioning; steeper learning curve
  • BCIS: bone cement implantation syndrome; hypotension + hypoxia at cement pressurisation; warn anaesthetist; vent femoral canal
  • Cup position safe zone: 40–45° abduction, 15–20° anteversion; combined anteversion concept guides component orientation
  • XLPE: 80% reduction in polyethylene wear vs conventional PE — now standard
  • MoM: ALVAL, pseudotumour, elevated Co/Cr — largely abandoned; annual surveillance with MARS MRI and ion levels for existing MoM patients
  • Vancouver B2/B3 PPF: loose stem = revision; B1: well-fixed stem = ORIF
  • PJI: two-stage revision gold standard for chronic infection; DAIR for acute (<3 weeks, well-fixed implant, biofilm-susceptible organism)
  • VTE prophylaxis: 28 days post-THA (LMWH or rivaroxaban) — NICE guideline
🧠 Test Yourself with OrthoMind AI

10 AI-generated high-yield questions by our AI engine

References

National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. 20th Annual Report. 2023. njrcentre.org.uk.
Hardinge K. The direct lateral approach to the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1982;64(1):17–19.
Moore AT. The self-locking metal hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1957;39(4):811–827.
Charnley J. Arthroplasty of the hip: a new operation. Lancet. 1961;1(7187):1129–1132.
Parvizi J et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(11):2992–2994.
Duncan CP, Masri BA. Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect. 1995;44:293–304.
Lombardi AV et al. Aseptic loosening in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004.
Lewis GN et al. Outcomes of total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prosthesis and patient factors. Bone Joint J. 2018.
NICE Guideline NG89: Venous thromboembolism in over 16s. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 2019.
Campbells Operative Orthopaedics. 14th Edition. Elsevier.
Orthobullets — Total Hip Arthroplasty, Approaches and Complications.