Gait After THA: Direct Anterior vs Manual Posterior vs Robotic Posterior
NCT ID: NCT07226973
Last Updated: 2025-11-12
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
NA
48 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2025-10-09
2027-11-15
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Robotic-Assisted Posterior Approach
Robotic-assisted THA introduces computer-navigated precision into implant alignment and biomechanical restoration. Contemporary systems (e.g., MAKO) offer intraoperative haptic guidance and preoperative CT-based planning to improve component placement accuracy.
Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty via posterior approach
Primary THA via posterior approach using pre-op CT-based planning and intra-op robotic assistance
Manual Direct Anterior Approach (DAA)
The DAA utilizes an internervous and intermuscular approach, preserving abductor and posterior soft tissues, and is associated with reduced dislocation rates and accelerated early recovery.⁶ However, it carries a steep learning curve and an elevated risk of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve neuropraxia.
Total hip arthroplasty via direct anterior approach (manual, non-robotic)
Primary THA performed via a direct anterior approach without robotic assistance
Manual Posterior Approach
PA remains the most commonly used technique worldwide, offering extensile exposure and preserved abductor function, though its historical association with increased dislocation risk has necessitated meticulous capsular and soft-tissue repair.
Total hip arthroplasty via posterior approach (manual, non-robotic)
Primary THA performed via a posterior approach without robotic assistance
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Total hip arthroplasty via direct anterior approach (manual, non-robotic)
Primary THA performed via a direct anterior approach without robotic assistance
Total hip arthroplasty via posterior approach (manual, non-robotic)
Primary THA performed via a posterior approach without robotic assistance
Robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty via posterior approach
Primary THA via posterior approach using pre-op CT-based planning and intra-op robotic assistance
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* BMI \<35
* Ability to walk unassisted (cane, walker, wheelchair, ect) for \> 150 feet preoperatively
Exclusion Criteria
* Neurological disorders affecting gait
* Contraindication to either DAA or PA
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Ochsner Health System
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
George Chimento, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Ochsner Health System
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Ochsner Health Center - Elmwood
Metairie, Louisiana, United States
Ochsner Medical Center
New Orleans, Louisiana, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Miguel Jaramillo
Role: primary
Miguel Jaramillo
Role: primary
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Varin D, Lamontagne M, Beaule PE. Does the anterior approach for THA provide closer-to-normal lower-limb motion? J Arthroplasty. 2013 Sep;28(8):1401-7. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.11.018. Epub 2013 Mar 16.
Yan L, Ge L, Dong S, Saluja K, Li D, Reddy KS, Wang Q, Yao L, Li JJ, Roza da Costa B, Xing D, Wang B. Evaluation of Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Surgical Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Jan 3;6(1):e2253942. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.53942.
Higgins BT, Barlow DR, Heagerty NE, Lin TJ. Anterior vs. posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty, a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2015 Mar;30(3):419-34. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.10.020. Epub 2014 Oct 22.
Yoo JI, Cha YH, Kim KJ, Kim HY, Choy WS, Hwang SC. Gait analysis after total hip arthroplasty using direct anterior approach versus anterolateral approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019 Feb 8;20(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s12891-019-2450-2.
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 Oct;33(7):2773-2792. doi: 10.1007/s00590-023-03528-8. Epub 2023 Apr 3.
Putananon C, Tuchinda H, Arirachakaran A, Wongsak S, Narinsorasak T, Kongtharvonskul J. Comparison of direct anterior, lateral, posterior and posterior-2 approaches in total hip arthroplasty: network meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2018 Feb;28(2):255-267. doi: 10.1007/s00590-017-2046-1. Epub 2017 Sep 27.
Wang Z, Bao HW, Hou JZ. Direct anterior versus lateral approaches for clinical outcomes after total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 Feb 26;14(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1095-z.
Wang Z, Hou JZ, Wu CH, Zhou YJ, Gu XM, Wang HH, Feng W, Cheng YX, Sheng X, Bao HW. A systematic review and meta-analysis of direct anterior approach versus posterior approach in total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 Sep 6;13(1):229. doi: 10.1186/s13018-018-0929-4.
Fagotti L, Falotico GG, Maranho DA, Ayeni OR, Ejnisman B, Cohen M, Astur DC. POSTERIOR VERSUS ANTERIOR APPROACH TO TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS. Acta Ortop Bras. 2021 Nov-Dec;29(6):297-303. doi: 10.1590/1413-785220212906244610.
Barrett WP, Turner SE, Leopold JP. Prospective randomized study of direct anterior vs postero-lateral approach for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2013 Oct;28(9):1634-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.01.034. Epub 2013 Mar 19.
Cheng TE, Wallis JA, Taylor NF, Holden CT, Marks P, Smith CL, Armstrong MS, Singh PJ. A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial in Total Hip Arthroplasty-Comparing Early Results Between the Direct Anterior Approach and the Posterior Approach. J Arthroplasty. 2017 Mar;32(3):883-890. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.08.027. Epub 2016 Aug 31.
Rosenlund S, Broeng L, Holsgaard-Larsen A, Jensen C, Overgaard S. Patient-reported outcome after total hip arthroplasty: comparison between lateral and posterior approach. Acta Orthop. 2017 Jun;88(3):239-247. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1291100. Epub 2017 Feb 18.
Meneghini RM, Smits SA, Swinford RR, Bahamonde RE. A randomized, prospective study of 3 minimally invasive surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty: comprehensive gait analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2008 Sep;23(6 Suppl 1):68-73. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2008.05.014.
Petis S, Howard J, Lanting B, Jones I, Birmingham T, Vasarhelyi E. Comparing the anterior, posterior and lateral approach: gait analysis in total hip arthroplasty. Can J Surg. 2018 Feb;61(1):50-57. doi: 10.1503/cjs.003217. Epub 2017 Dec 1.
Reininga IH, Stevens M, Wagenmakers R, Boerboom AL, Groothoff JW, Bulstra SK, Zijlstra W. Comparison of gait in patients following a computer-navigated minimally invasive anterior approach and a conventional posterolateral approach for total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Res. 2013 Feb;31(2):288-94. doi: 10.1002/jor.22210. Epub 2012 Aug 8.
Nelms NJ, Birch CE, Halsey DH, Blankstein M, McGinnis RS, Beynnon BD. Assessment of Early Gait Recovery After Anterior Approach Compared to Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Smartphone Accelerometer-Based Study. J Arthroplasty. 2020 Feb;35(2):465-470. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.09.030. Epub 2019 Sep 26.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2025.027
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id