1. Galmiche, R, Poitras, S, Dobransky, J, et al. Does surgical approach influence mid- to long-term patient-reported outcomes after primary total hip replacement? A comparison of the 3 main surgical approaches. Can J Surg. 2020;63:E181-E189.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline2. Miller, LE, Gondusky, JS, Bhattacharyya, S, Kamath, AF, 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. 2018;33:1296-1302.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline3. Reichert, JC, Volkmann, MR, Koppmair, M, et al. Comparative retrospective study of the direct anterior and transgluteal approaches for primary total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2015;39:2309-2313.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline4. Taunton, MJ, Trousdale, RT, Sierra, RJ, Kaufman, K, Pagnano, MW. John Charnley Award: randomized clinical trial of direct anterior and miniposterior approach THA: which provides better functional recovery? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018;476:216-229.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline5. Goebel, S, Steinert, AF, Schillinger, J, et al. Reduced postoperative pain in total hip arthroplasty after minimal-invasive anterior approach. Int Orthop. 2012;36:491-498.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI6. Berend, KR, Lombardi, AV, Seng, BE, Adams, JB. Enhanced early outcomes with the anterior supine intermuscular approach in primary total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(Suppl 6):107-120.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline7. Goytia, RN, Jones, LC, Hungerford, MW. Learning curve for the anterior approach total hip arthroplasty. Surg Orthop Adv. 2012;21:78-83.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline8. Learmonth, ID, Young, C, Rorabeck, C. The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet. 2007;370:1508-1519.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI9. Kurtz, SM, Lau, E, Watson, H, Schmier, JK, Parvizi, J. Economic burden of periprosthetic joint infection in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(suppl 8):61-65.e1.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline10. Kurtz, SM, Lau, EC, Son, MS, Chang, ET, Zimmerli, W, Parvizi, J. Are we winning or losing the battle with periprosthetic joint infection: trends in periprosthetic joint infection and mortality risk for the medicare population? J Arthroplasty. 2018;33:3238-3245.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline11. Pellegrini, A, Legnani, C, Meani, E. A new perspective on current prosthetic joint infection classifications: introducing topography as a key factor affecting treatment strategy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019;139:317-322.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline12. Chotanaphuti, T, Courtney, PM, Fram, B, et al. Hip and knee section, treatment, algorithm: proceedings of International Consensus on Orthopedic Infections. J Arthroplasty. 2019;34:S393-S397.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline13. Wildeman, P, Tevell, S, Eriksson, C, et al. Genomic characterization and outcome of prosthetic joint infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus. Sci Rep. 2020;10:5938.
Google Scholar | Medline14. Takahashi, J, Shono, Y, Hirabayashi, H, et al. Usefulness of white blood cell differential for early diagnosis of surgical wound infection following spinal instrumentation surgery. Spine. 2006;31:1020-1025.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI15. Takahashi, J, Ebara, S, Kamimura, M, et al. Early-phase enhanced inflammatory reaction after spinal instrumentation surgery. Spine. 2001;26:1698-1704.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI16. Dall, D. Exposure of the hip by anterior osteotomy of the greater trochanter. A modified anterolateral approach. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986;68:382-386.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline17. Bertin, KC, Röttinger, H. Anterolateral mini-incision hip replacement surgery: a modified Watson-Jones approach. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;429:248-255.
Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI18. Judet, J, Judet, R. The use of an artificial femoral head for arthroplasty of the hip joint. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1950;32-B:166-173.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline19. Matta, JM, Shahrdar, C, Ferguson, T. Single-incision anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty on an orthopaedic table. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;441:1151124.
Google Scholar | Crossref20. Post, ZD, Orozco, F, Diaz-Ledezma, C, Hozack, WJ, Ong, A. Direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: indications, technique, and results. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014;22:595-603.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI21. Iwata, E, Shigematsu, H, Koizumi, M, et al. Lymphopenia and elevated blood C-reactive protein levels at four days postoperatively are useful markers for early detection of surgical site infection following posterior lumbar instrumentation surgery. Asian Spine J. 2016;10:220-225.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline22. Iwata, E, Shigematsu, H, Koizumi, M, et al. Lymphocyte count at 4 days postoperatively and CRP level at 7 days postoperatively: reliable and useful markers for surgical site infection following instrumented spinal fusion. Spine. 2016;41:1173-1178.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline23. Iwata, E, Shigematsu, H, Yamamoto, Y, et al. Lymphocyte count at 4 days postoperatively: a reliable screening marker for surgical site infection after posterior lumbar decompression surgery. Spine. 2018;43:E1096-E1101.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline24. Inose, H, Kobayashi, Y, Yuasa, M, Hirai, T, Yoshii, T, Okawa, A. Procalcitonin and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio after spinal instrumentation surgery. Spine. 2019;44:E1356-E1361.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline25. Shen, CJ, Miao, T, Wang, ZF, et al. Predictive value of post-operative neutrophil/lymphocyte count ratio for surgical site infection in patients following posterior lumbar spinal surgery. Int Immunopharmacol. 2019;74:105705.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline26. Inose, H, Kobayashi, Y, Yuasa, M, Hirai, T, Yoshii, T, Okawa, A. Postoperative lymphocyte percentage and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio are useful markers for the early prediction of surgical site infection in spinal decompression surgery. J Orthop Surg. 2020;28:2309499020918402.
Google Scholar | SAGE Journals27. Parvizi, J, Zmistowski, B, Berbari, EF, et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the musculoskeletal infection society. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:2992-2994.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI28. Osmon, DR, Berbari, EF, Berendt, AR, et al. Executive summary: diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2013; 56: 1-10.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI29. Parvizi, J, Tan, TL, Goswami, K, et al. The 2018 definition of periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated criteria. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33:1309-1314.e2.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline30. Kazimoglu, H, Uysal, E, Dokur, M, Gunerkan, HR. Evaluation of the relationship between neutrophil lymphocyte ratio and the most common bacterial urinary tract infections after transplantation. Bratisl Lek Listy. 2019;120:161-165.
Google Scholar | Medline31. Marik, PE, Stephenson, E. The ability of procalcitonin, lactate, white blood cell count and neutrophil-lymphocyte count ratio to predict blood stream infection. Analysis of a large database. J Crit Care. 2020;60:135-139.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline32. Yildiz Balci, S, Kose, AO, Yildiz, MB, Ozcaliskan, S. Complete blood count parameters and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio values as markers for differentiation between systemic infectious and non-infectious uveitis. Int Ophthalmol. 2020;40:3033-3041.
Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline