Comparison of the cost analysis in total hip arthroplasty of anterior versus posterior approaches: A propensity score-matched cohort study in a single center

Abstract

Purpose

The advantage of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in an anterior approach compared with a posterior approach in terms of early postoperative pain and function and lowering dislocation risks is controversial. This study aimed to identify whether THA using the anterior approach lowers costs compared with the posterior approach.

Methods

We identified 294 patients who underwent primary THA and compared the cost of total inpatient stay, inpatient length of stay (LOS), cost of operating room, and the rates of discharged patients, complications, and reoperation between the anterior and posterior approaches using propensity score matching analysis.

Results

One-to-one matching resulted in 135 pairs of patients who underwent THA using both approaches. The cost of total inpatient stay was significantly lower in the anterior approach (anterior vs. posterior [1,322,800 vs. 1,445,219 yen]; p ​= ​0.04). Furthermore, in the anterior approach, the inpatient LOS was shorter (anterior vs. posterior [19.9 vs. 25.0 days]; p ​< ​0.001). However, there was no significant difference in the cost of the operating room and the rates of patients discharged home, total complications (anterior vs. posterior [5.2 vs. 11.1 ​%]; p ​= ​0.08), or revisions between the two approaches.

Conclusions

Using propensity score matching, the current study demonstrated that THA in the anterior approach shortened inpatient LOS and rendered an 8 ​% reduction in the total inpatient cost compared with the posterior approach.