Biomet Gains Hinge on Old Standby

Catch Phrase

Right now, the new catch phrase -- especially at Zimmer -- is "minimally invasive surgery."

Zimmer is, in fact, banking much of its future on the new technique. Already, the company has spent large sums training hundreds of surgeons to use MIS when implanting its devices. And in theory, at least, MIS does sound attractive. After all, the procedure -- with its smaller incisions -- seems like it would cause fewer complications than traditional surgery. And industry-sponsored research has backed up such assumptions.

But a rare independent study, conducted by orthopedic surgeons at Stanford University Hospital, found no significant benefits to MIS at all. Patients who underwent MIS spent about the same amount of time in the operating room as those who opted for traditional surgery. They experienced similar blood loss and transfusion rates. And they stayed in the hospital just as long and felt about the same when they finally did leave.

Moreover, the study found, MIS patients suffered more serious complications. Following surgery, they proved more vulnerable to wound problems. They also faced bigger setbacks -- such as poor implant positioning and fit -- that could trouble them down the road.

The researchers saw clear reason for alarm.

"If other studies of the mini-incision technique also show more component malposition and more serious post-operative complications than the standard-incision technique, then the long-term results of the mini-incision arthroplasty may be jeopardized," they wrote in the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. "Until the safety and efficacy of mini-incision total hip replacement are confirmed in the peer-reviewed literature by other investigators, we are concerned about the widespread use of the technique."