<- Back to digest

Spine - 2026-03-24 - Journal Article

Impact of Operative Order on Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion and Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Al-Saidi N, Al-Saidi N, Nguyen R, Dominari A, Reilly A, Mohammed D, Bydon M

meta-analysisLOE IIIn = 22 studies, 161,326 patientsMean 2.6 years

Topics

spine
PMID: 41887675DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000005700View on PubMed ->

Key Takeaway

In 161,326 patients with concomitant lumbar fusion and THA, operative order (SAHA vs. HASA) produced no significant difference in hip dislocation, mechanical loosening, periprosthetic fracture, DVT, infection, or revision rates (3.6% vs. 2.6%, P=0.5).

Summary Depth

Choose how much analysis to show on this article page.

Summary

This systematic review and meta-analysis asked whether performing lumbar fusion before THA (SAHA) versus THA before fusion (HASA) affects postoperative complications and revision rates. Random-effects meta-analysis of 22 studies (n=161,326) found SAHA was performed in 88.4% of cases. No statistically significant differences were identified between groups for any complication category or revision rate (SAHA 3.6% vs. HASA 2.6%, P=0.5).

Key Limitation

The 88.4% SAHA prevalence across included studies introduces profound selection bias, making the HASA group a non-representative minority whose indications and baseline characteristics likely differ systematically from the SAHA group.

Original Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess how operative order affects clinical outcomes and complications in patients with concomitant lumbar spinal and hip pathologies.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Concomitant lumbar spinal and hip pathologies are becoming increasingly prevalent in the growing population. Determining the optimal operative order for surgical treatment remains challenging, particularly when comparing spine arthrodesis followed by hip arthroplasty (SAHA) with hip arthroplasty followed by spine arthrodesis (HASA). Prior studies report conflicting results regarding outcomes and complications.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify studies reporting on postoperative outcomes and complications in patients with concomitant lumbar spinal and hip pathologies. Random-effects model meta-analysis of pooled outcomes was performed comparing operative order groups (SAHA and HASA), with postoperative complications and revisions being our primary endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies yielding 161,326 patients who received surgical treatment for concomitant lumbar spinal and hip pathologies were included. The majority of patients underwent SAHA (Pooled estimate: 88.4%, 95% CI: 76.9-96.3%, P=0.01). Females comprised 56.1% (95% CI: 49.2-62.8%) of the study population. The mean age was 70.6±6.4 years, and the mean follow-up duration was 2.6±2.1 years. The mean number of treated levels was 2.1±1.4. No significant differences were noted between the SAHA and HASA groups with respect to complications, including hip dislocation (P=0.7), mechanical loosening (P=0.8), periprosthetic fractures (P=0.7), deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (P=0.8), and infection (P=0.9). Revisions were required in 3.6% of patients in the SAHA group (95% CI: 2.5-4.9%) and 2.6% of patients in the HASA group (95% CI: 0.5-6.2%, P=0.5).

CONCLUSION

Among patients surgically treated for concomitant lumbar spinal and hip pathologies, SAHA was significantly more commonly performed than HASA. Our analysis shows that postoperative complications and revisions did not significantly differ depending on operative order.