Objective:To compared theclinic effectiveness ofBikini incision with that of traditional incisionbased on a short-term following and provide a suggesting reference for surgeons.Methods:The data of patients who accepted total hip arthroplasty (THA) through direct anterior approach (DAA) from January to November in 2019 were collected, male 13 and female 73, age 67.5±11.8 years (42-90 years). Forty-three patients were recruited to analyzeas one retrospective study in each group. Bikini incision: male 5 and female 38; age 69.7±10.8 years (51-90 years), following up 5.7 months (3.0-8.5 months). Traditional incision: male 8 and female 35; age 66.1±10.6 years (42-90 years), following up 6.5 months (3.0-10.0 months). The length area of incision, duration of operation, intraoperative blood loss, the rate of infection, lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) deficits, and the Harris score were analyzed between those two groups. The scars were evaluated according toPatients Scar Assessment Scale and Vancouver Scar Scale.Results:There were no significant difference in age, sex, BMI and diseases distribution between Bikini and traditional incision group. The length of incision, duration of operation, analgesic drugs dosage and hip Harris score wereanalysed no significant difference between those two groups. No patients in those twogroupssuffered from infection of incision. As to LFCN deficits, Bikini group had lower than traditional group (11.6% vs 32.6%, P=0.019). The scar area of Bikini group 1.0±0.4 cm 2 wasmeasured smaller rate than that of traditional group 16.5±28.7 cm 2. As to the Patients Scar Assessment Scale and Vancouver Scar Scale, Bikini group was 8.2±3.2 and 2.4±1.8, which was better than traditional group which was 17.0±5.8 and 4.2±3.0. Conclusion:Compared to traditional incision, Bikini incision was evaluated having significant lower rate of LFCN deficits and smaller scar,good cosmetic appearance and clinical application value.