Yes and no. In 2002, a group in Chicago developed a "minimally invasive total hip replacement." The goal was to make two small incisions, and thereby reduce muscle damage. This would allow people to be discharged from the hospital in one to two days. There was considerable excitement about this procedure for two years. However, it has largely been abandoned. Follow-up studies found high complication rates and no real difference in pain or quality compared to traditional total hip replacement.

So while "minimally invasive" options sound good, the jury is still out on whether they are any better.

Since 2002, all orthopedic surgeons have begun using smaller and smaller incisions to accomplish total hip replacement. Improved instruments, understanding, and techniques have resulted in numerous techniques that use one smaller incision to accomplish total hip replacement.

In choosing to have a total hip replacement, I advise finding an experienced orthopedic surgeon, one who does at least 25 total hip replacement surgeries per year. This level of experience is the only characteristic shown to be related to better outcomes for patients.