Adult Reconstruction

Hip Direct Lateral Approach (Hardinge)

Comprehensive guide to the Hardinge direct lateral approach to the hip - indications, technique, internervous plane, structures at risk, and surgical pearls for Orthopaedic exam

Core Procedure
advanced
By OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team

Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow • Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

High Yield Overview

HARDINGE DIRECT LATERAL APPROACH TO HIP

Transgluteal | Superior Gluteal Nerve at Risk | Most Common THA Approach in Australia

Critical Hardinge Approach Exam Points

No True Internervous Plane

Both TFL and gluteus medius are supplied by the superior gluteal nerve. This is not a true internervous plane - muscle splitting is required. Minimize denervation by splitting at musculotendinous junction.

Superior Gluteal Nerve Danger Zone

The superior gluteal nerve exits the pelvis 5cm proximal to the greater trochanter. Dissection beyond this risks permanent abductor paralysis. Always measure from GT before proximal extension.

Abductor Mechanism Repair

Meticulous repair of gluteus medius back to trochanter is critical. Poor repair causes Trendelenburg gait. Use non-absorbable suture through bone tunnels or repair to vastus ridge.

Dislocation Risk Profile

Lower dislocation risk (3%) compared to posterior approach (5-7%) but higher abductor weakness. Stability is excellent but gait may be compromised if poor repair or nerve injury.

Quick Decision Guide - Approach Selection

Mnemonic

HARDINGEHARDINGE - Key Steps

Memory Hook:HARDINGE guides you through the direct lateral approach - remember the nerve danger zone!

Mnemonic

SGASGA RISK - Superior Gluteal Artery

Memory Hook:SGA exits 5cm proximal to GT - stay distal to avoid disaster

Mnemonic

REPAIRREPAIR - Gluteus Medius Closure

Memory Hook:A good REPAIR prevents Trendelenburg gait - the most important step in Hardinge closure!

Overview and Background

Historical Background:

The direct lateral approach to the hip was originally described by McFarland and Osborne in 1954, and later modified by Hardinge in 1982. Hardinge's modification specifically addressed the anterior portion of gluteus medius, splitting it at the musculotendinous junction to minimize denervation while providing excellent exposure.

Evolution of the approach:

  • 1954: McFarland and Osborne describe transgluteal approach
  • 1982: Hardinge publishes seminal modification with GM split technique
  • 1990s-2000s: Becomes dominant approach in Australia and UK
  • 2010s: DAA gains popularity but direct lateral remains common

Current status: The Hardinge direct lateral approach is the most commonly used THA approach in Australia (approximately 40% of primary THA per AOANJRR). It offers excellent stability with lower dislocation rates than posterior approach, though at the cost of potential abductor mechanism disruption.

Why this approach matters:

  • Most common approach nationally - essential for Orthopaedic exam
  • Lower dislocation rate than posterior approach
  • Good femoral and acetabular exposure
  • Familiar to most Australian orthopaedic surgeons
  • Requires understanding of abductor protection and repair

Indications and Contraindications

Indications

Primary indications:

  • Primary total hip arthroplasty
  • Hemiarthroplasty (femoral neck fractures)
  • Hip resurfacing arthroplasty
  • Simple revision THA (liner exchange, head/neck change)

Advantages:

  • Lower dislocation rate compared to posterior approach
  • Excellent femoral exposure for stem insertion
  • Familiar to most Australian surgeons
  • Good acetabular visualization (anterior and superior)
  • No posterior soft tissue disruption

Disadvantages:

  • Splits abductor mechanism (risk of weakness)
  • Superior gluteal nerve at risk with proximal extension
  • Limited posterior acetabular wall access
  • Higher abductor weakness compared to anterior approach

AOANJRR Data

The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) reports that direct lateral approach accounts for approximately 40% of primary THA in Australia, making it the most common approach nationally.

Key Anatomy

Muscular layers (superficial to deep):

  1. Tensor fascia lata (TFL) - anterior muscle of iliotibial band
  2. Gluteus medius (GM) - main hip abductor
  3. Gluteus minimus - deep hip abductor
  4. Hip joint capsule

Neurovascular structures:

  • Superior gluteal nerve (L4-S1): Exits pelvis above piriformis, 5cm proximal to greater trochanter
  • Superior gluteal artery: Accompanies nerve, bleeding if violated
  • Inferior gluteal nerve and vessels: Posteriorly (safe)
  • Femoral neurovascular bundle: Anteriorly (safe)

Superior Gluteal Nerve Protection

The superior gluteal nerve exits the greater sciatic notch approximately 5cm proximal to the tip of the greater trochanter. It innervates gluteus medius, gluteus minimus, and TFL. Injury causes irreversible Trendelenburg gait. Measure this distance intraoperatively and avoid dissection beyond 4cm proximal to GT.

Trochanteric anatomy:

  • Greater trochanter: Insertion of gluteus medius (superior facet), gluteus minimus (anterior facet)
  • Vastus ridge: Lateral femur - origin of vastus lateralis
  • Piriformis fossa: Medial GT - landmark for femoral canal

Anatomy and Biomechanics

Neuromuscular anatomy:

The key to understanding the Hardinge approach is appreciating that there is no true internervous plane. Both muscles in the interval (TFL and gluteus medius) are supplied by the superior gluteal nerve, making this a muscle-splitting rather than muscle-separating approach.

Superior gluteal nerve course:

  • Exits pelvis through greater sciatic notch above piriformis
  • Passes between gluteus medius and minimus
  • Enters muscles approximately 5cm proximal to GT tip
  • Supplies: Gluteus medius, gluteus minimus, tensor fasciae latae
  • Injury causes permanent abductor paralysis

Biomechanical considerations:

Abductor mechanism:

  • Gluteus medius is the primary hip abductor
  • Moment arm: Distance from hip center to GT
  • Required for pelvic stability during single-leg stance
  • Splitting the muscle temporarily weakens abduction
  • Meticulous repair essential for functional recovery

Muscle fiber architecture:

  • GM: Fan-shaped, multiple pennation angles
  • Anterior fibers: Internal rotation, flexion
  • Middle fibers: Pure abduction
  • Posterior fibers: External rotation, extension
  • Splitting anterior portion preserves majority of function

Internervous Plane

No True Internervous Plane

The Direct Lateral (Hardinge) approach involves splitting muscles that are supplied by the same nerve.

  • Interval: Between Tensor Fascia Lata (TFL) and Gluteus Medius.
  • Nerve Supply: Superior Gluteal Nerve supplies BOTH muscles.
  • Technique: The approach involves splitting the TFL and the anterior one-third of the Gluteus Medius.
  • Safety: To minimize denervation, the split in the Gluteus Medius should not extend more than 5 cm proximal to the greater trochanter (nerve entry point).

This is distinguishing feature from the Anterior (Smith-Petersen) which has a TRUE internervous plane.

Classification Systems

Direct Lateral Approach Variants

Original McFarland-Osborne (1954):

  • Full transgluteal split
  • Higher denervation risk
  • Largely abandoned

Hardinge Modification (1982):

  • Splits anterior half of GM at musculotendinous junction
  • Current standard
  • Minimizes denervation

Dall Modification:

  • Detaches anterior GM insertion completely
  • Easier repair via bone tunnels
  • Some prefer for revision cases

The Hardinge modification is the standard technique described here.

Clinical Assessment

Preoperative Assessment:

History:

  • Nature and duration of hip pathology
  • Previous surgery (affects approach choice)
  • Functional status and expectations
  • Medical comorbidities affecting surgery

Physical Examination:

  • Gait assessment (baseline Trendelenburg)
  • Range of motion (flexion, rotation, abduction)
  • Leg length assessment
  • Neurovascular status documentation
  • Abductor strength (baseline for comparison)

Specific assessment for Hardinge approach:

  • Abductor strength testing: Pre-existing weakness may worsen
  • Obesity assessment: BMI over 35 increases technical difficulty
  • Skin condition: Lateral incision site evaluation
  • Hip ROM: Extension needed for femoral preparation

Preoperative Documentation

Document baseline abductor function before surgery. If patient has pre-existing Trendelenburg from previous surgery or pathology, this must be noted. Post-operative weakness will be blamed on surgery if not documented preoperatively.

Investigations

Imaging:

Essential:

  • AP pelvis radiograph: Both hips for comparison, templating
  • Lateral hip: Femoral version, anterior osteophytes
  • Cross-table lateral: If patient cannot flex hip

Templating requirements:

  • Acetabular cup size and position
  • Femoral stem sizing and offset
  • Leg length correction planning
  • Identifies challenging anatomy (protrusio, DDH)

Advanced imaging (selective):

  • CT: Complex anatomy, revision surgery, bone stock assessment
  • MRI: Soft tissue assessment, AVN staging, infection workup
  • Bone scan: Infection or loosening workup

Laboratory:

  • FBC, UEC, coagulation studies
  • Group and hold (cross-match if revision)
  • CRP/ESR if infection concern
  • HbA1c for diabetics

Management Algorithm

Approach Selection Algorithm

Step 1: Is patient suitable for ANY THA?

  • Failed conservative management
  • Adequate bone stock for implants
  • Medical fitness for surgery

Step 2: Hardinge approach considerations

Ideal candidates:

  • Primary THA with standard anatomy
  • Femoral neck fracture (hemiarthroplasty)
  • Low dislocation risk priority
  • Surgeon comfortable with approach

Consider alternatives if:

  • Previous lateral surgery with abductor damage
  • Need for extensive posterior acetabular access
  • Severe DDH requiring proximal exposure
  • Patient preference after informed consent

Surgeon experience is the most important factor in approach selection.

Positioning

Setup Checklist

Step 1Patient Position

Lateral decubitus position on radiolucent table with affected hip up.

  • Pelvis perpendicular to floor (check with C-arm AP view)
  • Anterior supports: Pubis and sacrum
  • Posterior support: Against sacrum
  • Perineal post: If using traction table (not mandatory)
Step 2Padding
  • Down leg: Pillow between knees, pad fibular head (peroneal nerve)
  • Up leg: Free to move through range of motion
  • Axilla: Protect brachial plexus with arm support
  • All bony prominences: Gel pads
Step 3Draping
  • Limb free-draped from iliac crest to mid-calf
  • Hip can be extended, flexed, adducted, rotated freely
  • C-arm access: Confirm adequate AP and lateral imaging
  • Incision landmarks visible: ASIS, GT, femoral shaft
Step 4Equipment Check
  • Retractors: Hohmann, Charnley, bent Hohmann
  • Oscillating saw: For femoral neck cut
  • Implants: Confirm size range available
  • Trial components: Full range of head sizes, neck lengths

Pelvic Orientation Critical

The pelvis must be perpendicular to the floor. Pelvic tilt or rotation causes acetabular malposition (anteversion/retroversion errors). Use C-arm to confirm true AP pelvis before starting. The obturator foramen should be symmetric and the coccyx should align with pubic symphysis.

Surgical Technique - Step by Step

Skin Incision and Superficial Dissection

Landmarks:

  • Greater trochanter (GT) - palpable landmark
  • Incision centered over GT
  • Direction: Straight lateral, parallel to femoral shaft

Incision:

  • Length: 10-15cm (8cm minimum for primary THA)
  • Proximal extent: 5cm proximal to tip of GT
  • Distal extent: 5cm distal to GT along femoral shaft
  • Depth: Through skin and subcutaneous fat to fascia lata

Superficial dissection:

  • Identify fascia lata (iliotibial band)
  • Palpate greater trochanter deep to fascia
  • Hemostasis of subcutaneous layer before proceeding

Incision Placement

The incision must be centered over the greater trochanter. Too anterior risks the femoral neurovascular bundle, too posterior makes anterior capsule difficult to reach. Palpate the GT carefully before marking incision.

Structures at Risk

Superior Gluteal Nerve

The Superior Gluteal Nerve is the primary structure at risk. It exits the greater sciatic notch and runs between gluteus medius and minimus, entering the muscles approximately 4-5 cm proximal to the greater trochanter. Injury results in abductor paralysis and Trendelenburg gait. Safe Zone: Dissection must remain distal to this 5cm danger zone.

Structures at Risk Summary

Complications

Complications Specific to Hardinge Approach

Abductor dysfunction:

  • Incidence: 5-20% (varies by series)
  • Causes: Superior gluteal nerve injury, poor GM repair, excessive splitting
  • Prevention: Limit proximal dissection, meticulous repair
  • Treatment: Physiotherapy, if persistent consider revision repair or GT advancement

Heterotopic ossification:

  • Incidence: 10-30% (radiographic), 5% symptomatic
  • Risk factors: Male, DISH, previous HO, delay to surgery
  • Prevention: Indomethacin 25mg TDS for 6 weeks or single-dose radiation
  • Treatment: Excision if symptomatic after maturation (12 months)

Dislocation:

  • Incidence: 2-3% (lower than posterior approach)
  • Direction: Usually posterior (if occurs)
  • Prevention: Restore offset, avoid combined flexion-adduction-internal rotation
  • Treatment: Closed reduction, if recurrent consider revision

Abductor Strength Recovery

Even with perfect technique, patients typically have temporary abductor weakness for 3-6 months post-operatively. Trendelenburg gait is common early. Reassure patients this improves with physiotherapy. Persistent weakness beyond 6 months warrants investigation (EMG to assess nerve, MRI to assess repair integrity).

Postoperative Care

Immediate Postoperative Period (Day 0-2):

Pain Management:

  • Multimodal analgesia (paracetamol + NSAID + opioid PRN)
  • Regional block consideration (fascia iliaca or femoral)
  • PCA for first 24-48 hours if needed
  • Transition to oral by day 1-2

Mobilization:

  • Weight bearing as tolerated from day 0
  • Walking frame initially, progress to crutches/stick
  • Physiotherapy assessment for safe mobility
  • Stairs before discharge

DVT Prophylaxis:

  • Mechanical: TED stockings, calf pumps
  • Chemical: Rivaroxaban 10mg daily for 5 weeks OR enoxaparin OR aspirin
  • Early mobilization most important

Hip Precautions:

  • Controversial for direct lateral approach
  • Some surgeons: No precautions needed
  • Conservative: Avoid extremes of motion for 6 weeks
  • Most important: Avoid combined flexion-adduction-IR

Wound Care:

  • Waterproof dressing until healed (10-14 days)
  • Remove staples/sutures at 10-14 days
  • Monitor for wound complications
  • Lateral wound position: Less contamination risk than posterior

Discharge:

  • Typically day 1-3 for primary THA
  • Criteria: Safe mobility, wound satisfactory, pain controlled
  • Arrange outpatient physiotherapy
  • Emergency contact information provided

Rehabilitation:

Weeks 1-6:

  • Continue walking aids (frame → crutches → stick)
  • Abductor strengthening - critical for this approach
  • Range of motion exercises (within precautions)
  • Monitor for Trendelenburg development

Weeks 6-12:

  • Wean walking aids
  • Progress strengthening program
  • Return to driving (typically 6-8 weeks)
  • Swimming, stationary cycling permitted

Beyond 3 months:

  • Return to full activities as comfort allows
  • Low-impact sports acceptable
  • Annual review initially, then as needed
  • Lifelong follow-up recommended

Abductor Recovery Timeline

Abductor weakness is EXPECTED after Hardinge approach. Most patients have some Trendelenburg for 3-6 months. Reassure patients this improves. Persistent weakness beyond 6 months requires investigation (MRI for repair, EMG for nerve).

Outcomes and Prognosis

Functional Outcomes:

Short-term (under 2 years):

  • Pain relief: Over 95% significant improvement
  • Function: Harris Hip Score typically improves from 45 to over 85
  • Patient satisfaction: Over 90% satisfied or very satisfied
  • Return to activities: 3-6 months for most

Long-term (over 10 years):

  • Implant survival: Over 95% at 10 years (similar to other approaches)
  • Revision rate: Approximately 1% per year
  • Dislocation rate: 2-3% (lower than posterior approach)
  • Functional maintenance: Most maintain excellent function

Approach-Specific Outcomes:

Abductor function:

  • Temporary weakness (under 6 months): 50-70% of patients
  • Persistent weakness (over 6 months): 5-20%
  • Permanent Trendelenburg: 3-5%
  • Directly related to repair quality and nerve protection

Dislocation comparison:

ApproachDislocation Rate
Direct Lateral2-3%
Posterior5-7%
Anterior1-2%

Heterotopic ossification:

  • Any grade: 10-30%
  • Clinically significant: 5%
  • Higher than posterior approach
  • Prophylaxis reduces significantly

Prognostic Factors:

Good prognosis:

  • Primary THA for osteoarthritis
  • Experienced surgeon
  • Meticulous GM repair technique
  • Good preoperative abductor function
  • Compliant with rehabilitation

Poorer prognosis:

  • Revision surgery
  • Pre-existing abductor weakness
  • Obesity (BMI over 35)
  • Poor repair quality
  • Superior gluteal nerve injury

Registry Data: Per AOANJRR, the direct lateral approach has revision rates equivalent to other approaches at 10 years. Surgeon volume and experience are more important predictors of outcome than approach selection.

Evidence Base and Key Studies

AOANJRR Annual Report - Approach Utilization

3
AOANJRR • Annual Report (2023)
Clinical Implication: Hardinge approach is the most common approach in Australia. Familiarity is essential for exam and practice.
Limitation: Registry data reflects surgeon preference and training background more than approach superiority.

Abductor Function After Direct Lateral Approach

2
Downing et al • J Arthroplasty (2001)
Clinical Implication: Limit proximal dissection and ensure meticulous GM repair to minimize abductor dysfunction.
Limitation: Small sample size, no comparison group with alternative approaches.

Dislocation Rates: Lateral vs Posterior Approach

2
Jolles et al • JBJS Br (2006)
Clinical Implication: Direct lateral approach has lower dislocation risk than posterior approach in primary THA.
Limitation: Retrospective design, surgeon experience may confound results.

Gait Analysis After Direct Lateral Approach THA

2
Madsen et al • Acta Orthop (2004)
Clinical Implication: Expect some residual gait abnormality even with successful surgery - counsel patients accordingly.
Limitation: Small sample size, no comparison with other surgical approaches.

Nerve Injury Risk in Direct Lateral Approach

3
Ramesh et al • J Arthroplasty (1996)
Clinical Implication: The 5cm rule is evidence-based - never extend proximal dissection beyond 5cm from GT tip.
Limitation: Cadaveric study may not fully represent in vivo surgical conditions.

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 1: Describe the Hardinge Approach

EXAMINER

"Walk me through the Hardinge direct lateral approach to the hip. What are the key anatomical landmarks and structures at risk?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
The Hardinge approach is a direct lateral approach to the hip that splits the abductor mechanism. I would position the patient lateral decubitus with the affected hip up, ensuring the pelvis is perpendicular to the floor. My incision is centered over the greater trochanter, extending 5cm proximally and distally. I incise the fascia lata and split the anterior third of tensor fascia lata. This exposes the gluteus medius, which I split at the musculotendinous junction - specifically the anterior half. I reflect the GM-minimus sleeve anteriorly along with vastus lateralis to expose the hip capsule. The critical danger is the superior gluteal nerve, which exits the pelvis 5cm proximal to the greater trochanter. I never extend my dissection more than 4cm proximal to GT to protect this nerve. After performing the arthroplasty, meticulous repair of the gluteus medius back to the greater trochanter with non-absorbable suture is essential to prevent abductor dysfunction.
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Scenario 2: Post-op Trendelenburg Gait

EXAMINER

"A 68-year-old woman is 6 months post THA via Hardinge approach. She has persistent Trendelenburg gait and hip abductor weakness. How would you assess and manage this?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
Persistent abductor weakness at 6 months post-operatively is concerning and requires systematic evaluation. First, I would take a thorough history - was there early Trendelenburg that has persisted, or new onset? I would examine for Trendelenburg sign and test abductor strength manually. Key differential diagnoses are: (1) superior gluteal nerve injury, (2) gluteus medius repair failure, (3) component malposition causing impingement, or (4) periprosthetic fracture. My investigations would include AP pelvis and lateral hip X-rays to assess component position and look for fracture, and I would strongly consider MRI to evaluate the integrity of the gluteus medius repair and look for muscle atrophy. EMG/NCS would assess superior gluteal nerve function if nerve injury is suspected. If imaging shows intact repair and nerve studies are normal, I would continue physiotherapy with focus on abductor strengthening for another 3-6 months. If there is clear repair failure on MRI, I would discuss surgical revision - either direct repair if tissue quality good, or greater trochanter advancement if chronic. If EMG confirms nerve injury, prognosis is poor but physiotherapy and gait aids may help compensate.
VIVA SCENARIOCritical

Scenario 3: Intraoperative Superior Gluteal Artery Bleeding

EXAMINER

"During a Hardinge approach THA, you extend the gluteus medius split proximally to improve acetabular exposure. You encounter significant arterial bleeding from the proximal wound. How do you manage this?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is concerning for superior gluteal artery injury from excessive proximal dissection. I need to control the bleeding and protect the superior gluteal nerve while doing so. My immediate steps are: (1) pack the wound with surgical swabs and apply direct pressure, (2) ensure anesthesia is aware and prepare for potential transfusion, (3) suction the field to identify the bleeding source. The superior gluteal artery exits the pelvis above the piriformis muscle, approximately 5cm proximal to the greater trochanter, accompanied by the superior gluteal nerve. If I can visualize the bleeding vessel, I would attempt direct pressure with a swab on a stick, avoiding blind clamping which risks nerve injury. If direct pressure controls bleeding, I would leave the pack in place and continue with the case, removing it gently at the end. If bleeding persists, options include: (1) careful ligation with ties under direct vision (nerve is immediately adjacent - must visualize), (2) packing and leaving pack overnight with removal in 24 hours, or (3) calling vascular surgery for assistance if cannot control. The key is avoiding blind clamping or excessive dissection which will definitely injure the nerve. After controlling bleeding, I would reassess whether I have adequate acetabular exposure - if not, I may need to convert to a different approach or accept limited exposure. Post-operatively, I would monitor for nerve injury (Trendelenburg) and anemia requiring transfusion.

MCQ Practice Points

Internervous Plane Question

Q: What is the internervous plane in the Hardinge direct lateral approach to the hip? A: There is NO true internervous plane. Both tensor fascia lata and gluteus medius are supplied by the superior gluteal nerve. The approach splits both muscles (TFL anteriorly, GM at musculotendinous junction) to minimize denervation.

Superior Gluteal Nerve Question

Q: At what distance from the greater trochanter does the superior gluteal nerve exit the pelvis? A: Approximately 5cm proximal to the tip of the greater trochanter. Dissection beyond this point risks permanent abductor paralysis. Limit proximal extension to 4cm from GT to maintain safe zone.

Gluteus Medius Split Question

Q: Where is the gluteus medius split in the Hardinge approach? A: The anterior half of gluteus medius is split at the musculotendinous junction. This is approximately anterior third of the muscle. Splitting at the junction minimizes denervation compared to splitting through muscle belly.

Dislocation Rate Question

Q: What is the dislocation rate after primary THA via Hardinge approach compared to posterior approach? A: Hardinge (direct lateral) has lower dislocation rate (approximately 3%) compared to posterior approach (5-7%). However, Hardinge has higher risk of abductor dysfunction.

Closure Question

Q: What is the most critical step in closing a Hardinge approach? A: Meticulous repair of the gluteus medius back to the greater trochanter using non-absorbable suture (e.g., No. 2 Ethibond). Poor repair causes Trendelenburg gait and abductor dysfunction in up to 20% of patients.

Australian Context

AOANJRR Data:

  • Direct lateral approach is the most common THA approach in Australia (40% market share)
  • Posterior approach second (35%)
  • Anterior approach growing (20%)
  • Regional variation: More lateral in Victoria/SA, more posterior in NSW/QLD

Training implications:

  • Most Australian orthopaedic trainees learn Hardinge as primary THA approach
  • Important for Orthopaedic exam - examiners expect detailed knowledge
  • Familiarity with approach selection based on patient factors

Medico-legal considerations:

  • Abductor dysfunction is a recognized complication - must be in consent
  • Superior gluteal nerve injury is preventable - staying under 5cm from GT is standard of care
  • Documentation of repair technique important if post-op abductor weakness

Exam Preparation

For Orthopaedic exam, you must be able to describe the Hardinge approach in detail including: positioning, skin incision, muscle intervals (TFL split, GM split at musculotendinous junction), structures at risk (superior gluteal nerve 5cm from GT), and closure technique (GM repair with non-absorbable suture). Know the AOANJRR data showing it's the most common approach in Australia.

HARDINGE DIRECT LATERAL APPROACH

High-Yield Exam Summary