Regarding the Anterior approach vs the Posterior approach - there are fans of each.
My own trusted orthopedic surgeon, who does about 250 hip replacement and/or revisions per year, favors the Posterior approach. His reasons are solid - especially that the field of view of the femur is superior, so exact placement of the stem is improved, and the selection of prosthetics that can be used is far more diverse than in the Anterior approach. He feels most poor results are from imperfect placement of the implant. He is particularly insistent that women get better results from the posterior approach because with their smaller bones the consequence of any minor bad angle is magnified.
Now, when I hear about (and look at) the contorted position required on the Hana table, I also see how it can magnify preexisting problems. But I also know it helps surgeons deal with complex leg fractures and other orthopedic issues.
After doing some research, it does not appear there are any lawsuits regarding the Hana table.

What is the takeaway? Like everything else, in medicine and in life, this is not a "black and white" situation. Remember that those of us who come to Mayo Connect looking for answers, like @mitfit @nancymulloy and @daisy22, are here because they had a problem. The hundreds, or maybe even thousands, who had successful surgeries and recoveries are not here talking about it.

And @shoppingdiane the experiences of these three people may have saved you from a problem because you asked in advance!
Sue
PS I will again add my 2 cents worth (after 2 hip replacements and 3 revisions over nearly 20 years) that doing both hips at once is tricky business - especially if you already have back pain. Why did you want to do both at once?