Comparison of scars from total hip replacements done with a standard or a mini-incision.

[UNLABELLED] Scar cosmesis is one of the proposed benefits of mini-incision total hip replacement as opposed to standard-incision procedures; however, there has been no scientific proof of this clinical outcome. The cosmetic appearances of healed incisions of 34 primary total hip replacement procedures done by one surgeon using either a mini-incision (20 procedures) or a standard-length incision (14 procedures) were compared at an average of 2 years postoperatively. Each scar's appearance was graded independently by two plastic surgeons using a standardized rating system. Patients answered a questionnaire regarding their subjective assessment of their scar. The blinded observers found that more mini-scars (six of 20) were rated poor than standard scars (one of 14) and that more standard-incision patients had scars that were rated good. More mini-incision patients (two of 20 versus zero of 14) had wound-healing problems. All the patients thought that their hip scar was acceptable in appearance, but 30 of 31 patients rated the relief of pain and total hip replacement longevity as higher priorities than scar cosmesis. The cosmesis of mini-incision total hip replacement scars may be inferior to standard-incision scars because of skin and soft tissue damage produced by high retractor pressures needed for exposure using a limited skin incision.

[LEVEL OF EVIDENCE] Therapeutic study, Level II-2 (prospective comparative study). See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.