You are about to leave jnjmedtech.com. By clicking to continue, you will be taken to a web site governed by their own Legal and Privacy Policies.
ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement
ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement
ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement by DePuy Synthes is a leading solution in the Anterior Approach to hip replacement.
Find a Doctor
What is ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement?
ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement by DePuy Synthes, is a leading solution in the Anterior Approach to hip replacement.
The surgical approach (sometimes called the surgical technique) is the way the surgeon makes their incision so that they can operate on the bones that make up the hip joint. Many surgeons use what is called a traditional or posterior approach (incision through the back of the hip), while an increasing number of surgeons are using an Anterior Approach2,5,11,16 (incision through the front of the hip). The popularity of the Anterior Approach is rapidly growing because of its measured advantages and improved outcomes.1,2,5,11,12,16
Unlike a traditional approach where the muscles are cut, the Anterior Approach allows the surgeon to work between the muscles keeping them intact. By keeping the muscles intact, the Anterior Approach may allow for shorter recovery, less pain, a shorter hospital stay and fewer post-operative restrictions.1,5
ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement is the DePuy Synthes branded solution for Anterior Approach. It is an Anterior Approach primary or revision hip replacement technique, which utilizes DePuy Synthes implant products.
In addition, ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement is also supported by a number of advanced technologies designed to help optimize your surgical experience.
You are entering a rotating card carousel. Navigate the items by using the previous/next buttons.
Meet Ishbel. Ishbel was hesitant to have hip replacement surgery because she thought she would have to give up her active lifestyle, but she realized what she was doing for the pain wasn’t working for her anymore.
Ernie first started noticing hip pain at age 45. By age 52, he was experiencing sharp pains when he lifted his legs, and he walked bent over. He was getting less and less sleep, and he was regularly taking over-the-counter pain relievers.
Dave is no stranger to the impact that a total hip replacement can have to help patients get back to their lives. He had his right hip replaced in December 2016.
Jeannette was having a hard time enjoying her hobbies and participating in basic activities like walking because of her hip pain; even just riding along in the golf cart with her husband had become too painful.
Potential Benefits of ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement
ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement patients may:
- Spend less time in the hospital1,2,5,12,16
- Have a faster recovery2,5,11,16
- Experience less pain2,5,11
- Use less narcotics to relieve pain after surgery1,2,16
than those patients treated with traditional approaches.
VELYS™ Digital Surgery
ANTERIOR ADVANTAGE™ Hip Replacement utilizes additional tools and exclusive technologies to help optimize the experience for the surgeon and the patient.
IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION
As with any medical treatment, individual results may vary. The performance of hip replacements depends on age, weight, activity level and other factors. There are potential risks and recovery takes time. If you have conditions that limit rehabilitation you should not have this surgery. Only an orthopaedic surgeon can tell you if hip replacement is right for you.
1. Petis SM, et al. “In Hospital Cost Analysis of THA: Does Surgical Approach Matter?” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2016; (31)” 53-58.
2. Zawadsky MW, et al. “Early Outcome Comparison Between the Direct Anterior Approach and the Mini-Incision Posterior Approach for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: 150 Consecutive Cases.” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2014; (29): 1256-1260.
3. Martin CT, et al. “A Comparison of Hospital Length of Stay and Short-term Morbidity Between the Anterior and the Posterior Approaches to Total Hip Arthroplasty.” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2013; (28): 849-854.
4. Christensen CP, et al. “Comparison of Patient Function during the First Six Weeks after Direct Anterior or Posterior Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA): A Randomized Study.” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2015; (30): 94-97.
5. Barrett WP, et al. “Prospective Randomized Study of Direct Anterior vs Postero-Lateral Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty.” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2013; (28): 1634-1638.
6. Alecci V, et al. “Comparison of primary total hip replacements performed with a direct anterior approach versus the standard lateral approach: perioperative findings” J Orthopaed Traumatol 2010.7. Higgins BT, et al. 2015. JOA. “Anterior vs. posterior approach for THA, a systematic review and meta-analysis.” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2015; (30): 419–434.
7. Higgins BT, et al. 2018. JOA. “Anterior vs. posterior approach for THA, a systematic review and meta-analysis.” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2015; (30): 419-434.
8. Restrepo C, et al. “Prospective Randomized Study of Two Surgical Approaches for Total Hip Arthroplasty.” The Journal of Arthroplasty 2010; (25(5)): 671-679.
9. Rodriguez JA, et al. “Does the Direct Anterior Approach in THA Offer Faster Rehabilitation and Comparable Safety to the Posterior Approach?” Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013.
10. Vail TP, et al. “Approaches in Primary THA.” The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2009; (91): 10-12.
11. Bourne MH, et al. “A comparison between direct anterior surgery of the hip (DASH) and the anterolateral (AL) surgical approach to THA: Postoperative outcomes.” 2010 AAOS New Orleans, LA, Poster #014
12. Kamath A, Chitnis A, Holy C, et al. Medical resource utilization and costs for total hip arthroplasty: benchmarking an anterior approach technique in the Medicare population. J Med Econ. 2017; 1-7.
13. Miller LE, Gondusky JS, Bhattacharyya S, Kamath AK, Boettner F, Wright J. Does Surgical Approach Affect Outcomes in Total Hip Arthroplasty Through 90 Days of Follow-Up? A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2017: 33(4); 1296-1302.
14. Miller LE, Gondusky JS, Kamath AT, Boettner F, Wright J, Bhattacharyya S. Influence of Surgical Approach on Long-Term Complication Risk in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Acta Orthopaedica. 2018; 89: 1-7.
15. Boettner F, Zingg M, Emara A, et al. The Accuracy of Acetabular Component Positioning Using a Novel Method to Determine Anteversion. JoA. 2017; (32): 1180-1185.
16. Schweppe et al. Does Surgical Approach in Total Hip Arthroplasty Affect Rehabilitation, Discharge Disposition, and Readmission Rate? Surgical Technology International XXIII. 2013. Orthopedic Surgery, 219-227.
17. Jacquot L, Bonnin MP, Machenaud A, Choteau J, Saffarini M, Vidalain JP. Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes at 25-30 Years of a Hip Stem Fully Coated With Hydroxyapatite. J Arthroplasty. 2018 Feb;33(2):482-490.
18. NJR National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, 15th Annual Report, 2018. Table 3.9. Available from www.njrreports.org.uk
19. TSM Report, PINNACLE WW implantations YTD, 2001 - 2017.
20. Vidalain JP. 25-year ARTRO Results: A Special Vintage from the Old World. The CORAIL Hip System: A Practical approach based on 25 years of experience. 2011;Chapter 4.2.1:94-101
Please refer to the instructions for use for a complete list of indications, contraindications, warnings and precautions.