Bikini versus Traditional Incision in DAA THA: Patient Satisfaction, Surgeon Observation, and LFCN Damage.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Pub Date : 2025-09-06 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/ORR.S524339
Maharshi S Nagda, Lyndsay E Somerville, Michael Shehata, Brent A Lanting
{"title":"Bikini versus Traditional Incision in DAA THA: Patient Satisfaction, Surgeon Observation, and LFCN Damage.","authors":"Maharshi S Nagda, Lyndsay E Somerville, Michael Shehata, Brent A Lanting","doi":"10.2147/ORR.S524339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The bikini incision (BI) used in direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty (DAA THA) theoretically improves scar aesthetics by utilizing the inguinal crease; however, current literature suggests its transverse orientation increases the risk of injury to the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN). This study examines (1) patient and surgeon satisfaction with scar appearance and (2) differences in post-operative LFCN sensation between the vertical, traditional incision (TI) and the BI.</p><p><strong>Questions/purposes: </strong>In this pilot study, the following questions were investigated: (1) Do BI patients experience increased scar satisfaction compared to TI patients? (2) Does the surgeon report greater satisfaction with BI scars compared to TI scars? (3) Do BI patients have a reduced incidence of LFCN sensory disturbance compared to TI patients?.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>Fifty-five patients (32 TI and 23 BI), at least 6 months post-DAA THA, were recruited from a high-volume, fellowship-trained reconstruction surgeon. 91% of the BI group was female, compared to 50% of the TI group. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) allowed patients to describe scar appearance and complications (eg, pain and itchiness) and enabled the surgeon to assess vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, relief, pliability, and surface area. Monofilament testing at superomedial, superolateral, inferomedial, and inferolateral quadrants of the anterior thigh assessed LFCN hypoesthesia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>POSAS analysis demonstrated that (1) BI patients were significantly more satisfied with scar appearance than TI patients (p < 0.05), and (2) the surgeon was significantly more satisfied with BI scars than TI scars (p < 0.05). (3) Monofilament testing showed significantly more LFCN impairment in the inferomedial quadrant of the TI group (p < 0.0125).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates improved patient and surgeon satisfaction with the BI. Contrary to current beliefs, the BI better preserves LFCN innervation relative to the TI.</p>","PeriodicalId":19608,"journal":{"name":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","volume":"17 ","pages":"437-450"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12422138/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopedic Research and Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/ORR.S524339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The bikini incision (BI) used in direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty (DAA THA) theoretically improves scar aesthetics by utilizing the inguinal crease; however, current literature suggests its transverse orientation increases the risk of injury to the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN). This study examines (1) patient and surgeon satisfaction with scar appearance and (2) differences in post-operative LFCN sensation between the vertical, traditional incision (TI) and the BI.

Questions/purposes: In this pilot study, the following questions were investigated: (1) Do BI patients experience increased scar satisfaction compared to TI patients? (2) Does the surgeon report greater satisfaction with BI scars compared to TI scars? (3) Do BI patients have a reduced incidence of LFCN sensory disturbance compared to TI patients?.

Patients and methods: Fifty-five patients (32 TI and 23 BI), at least 6 months post-DAA THA, were recruited from a high-volume, fellowship-trained reconstruction surgeon. 91% of the BI group was female, compared to 50% of the TI group. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) allowed patients to describe scar appearance and complications (eg, pain and itchiness) and enabled the surgeon to assess vascularity, pigmentation, thickness, relief, pliability, and surface area. Monofilament testing at superomedial, superolateral, inferomedial, and inferolateral quadrants of the anterior thigh assessed LFCN hypoesthesia.

Results: POSAS analysis demonstrated that (1) BI patients were significantly more satisfied with scar appearance than TI patients (p < 0.05), and (2) the surgeon was significantly more satisfied with BI scars than TI scars (p < 0.05). (3) Monofilament testing showed significantly more LFCN impairment in the inferomedial quadrant of the TI group (p < 0.0125).

Conclusion: This study demonstrates improved patient and surgeon satisfaction with the BI. Contrary to current beliefs, the BI better preserves LFCN innervation relative to the TI.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

比基尼切口与传统切口在DAA THA中的比较:患者满意度、外科医生观察和LFCN损伤。
背景:比基尼切口(BI)用于直接前路全髋关节置换术(DAA THA),理论上通过利用腹股沟折痕改善疤痕美观;然而,目前的文献表明其横向取向增加了股骨外侧皮神经(LFCN)损伤的风险。本研究考察(1)患者和外科医生对疤痕外观的满意度;(2)垂直切口、传统切口(TI)和BI术后LFCN感觉的差异。问题/目的:在这项初步研究中,调查了以下问题:(1)与TI患者相比,BI患者对疤痕的满意度是否更高?(2)外科医生对BI疤痕的满意度是否高于TI疤痕?(3)与TI患者相比,BI患者LFCN感觉障碍的发生率是否降低?患者和方法:55例患者(32例TI和23例BI),在daa THA后至少6个月,从一个高容量,研究员培训的重建外科医生中招募。BI组91%为女性,而TI组为50%。患者和观察员疤痕评估量表(POSAS)允许患者描述疤痕外观和并发症(例如,疼痛和瘙痒),并使外科医生能够评估血管状况、色素沉着、厚度、缓解、柔韧性和表面积。单纤丝测试在大腿前的上内侧、上外侧、内内侧和外外侧象限评估LFCN感觉减退。结果:POSAS分析显示:(1)BI患者对疤痕外观的满意度显著高于TI患者(p < 0.05);(2)外科医生对BI疤痕的满意度显著高于TI疤痕(p < 0.05)。(3)单丝检测显示,TI组LFCN内象限损伤显著增加(p < 0.0125)。结论:本研究提高了患者和外科医生对BI的满意度。与目前的看法相反,相对于TI, BI更好地保留了LFCN的神经支配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orthopedic Research and Reviews
Orthopedic Research and Reviews Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Orthopedic Research and Reviews is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal focusing on the patho-physiology of the musculoskeletal system, trauma, surgery and other corrective interventions to restore mobility and function. Advances in new technologies, materials, techniques and pharmacological agents will be particularly welcome. Specific topics covered in the journal include: Patho-physiology and bioengineering, Technologies and materials science, Surgical techniques, including robotics, Trauma management and care, Treatment including pharmacological and non-pharmacological, Rehabilitation and Multidisciplinarian care approaches, Patient quality of life, satisfaction and preference, Health economic evaluations. The journal welcomes submitted papers covering original research, basic science and technology, clinical studies, reviews and evaluations, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary, case reports and extended reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信